Viet Nam War-What Would You Have Done?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

There seemed to be several options a young man who was drafted or subject to the draft in Viet Nam could have chosen....


He could have done what Wes Clark and John Kerrey did.... They served....

He could have done what Muhammad Ali and others like him did... Actively resist the draft out of conviction that the war was wrong and suffer the consequences which did include imprisonment.....

IMHO, these were the two honorable choices a brave man who had physical as well as moral courage could have chosen....


Now to the passive resisters...Folks like Clinton, Dean, Quayle, Bush2, Cheney, Lieberman and countless others who gamed the system by getting student and medical deferments or serving in the Guard where your chances of going to Nam were not very high....

How many poor white or black kids were able to get student deferments or bring letters from their doctors to avoid service?


What would you have done?


P. S. I doubt I would have been an active or passive resistor... I would have tried to serve in a capacity as far away from battle as possible.... But, hey I'm honest.....

[Demobrat]

1. Just curious.

How old were you in 1968? Were any of your friends drafted? What happened to them? Were they killed? Did that bother you? Did any of them come back addicted to heroin? How did they cope with that? How about psychological problems? Do you know any women who deliberately got pregnant to keep their boyfriends out of the service? How did their lives turn out? Can't wait to hear your responses.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. I Was Ten...

If I felt the war was wrong I would have gone to the draft board like Ali did and refuse induction....


But, I answered honestly... I would have volunteered, prolly in the Air Force, and since I couldn't fly, I'd probably never get close to battle....

I wouldn't have gamed the system and served in the Guard or got a student or medical deferment...

[Demobrat]

9. What if you really were a student?

Or really did have a medical problem? Would you have quit college in order to go? Would you have hidden your medical problem from the Army doctors so that they would take you?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. Well, JFK Had A Multitude of

medical problems and he got into WW2....


He was probably the only rich kid to have his daddy pull strings to get him i-n-t-o the service.....
That's why he was a genuine hero....


I already answered .... I'd prolly try to save my own skin.... I'm not proud of it.......

But I would never put folks like Cheney, Clinton, Quayle, Bush,Lieberman, Dean, Bill Bennett in the same category with folks like:

John Kerrey, Max Cleland,John McCain, Wes Clark, and others who risked their life and limb to fight the war......

Or folks like Muhammad Ali, many Jehovahs Witnesses, Quakers, and pacifists who risked their liberty to oppose it....

[Demobrat]

18. WW2 was not Vietnam.

There is no comparison. None.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. So Do What Ali

the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Quakers, and pacifists did....


Actively oppose the draft


Many Jehovahs Witnesses were imprisoned during WW2 rather than serve in a war that their religion prohibited...


You'll never convince me that Dick Cheney and folks like him who got several deferments has the same "stuff" as Muhammad Ali who risked imrisonment and gave up three and one half years years of his career in his prime to oppose it or Max Cleland who gave up three limbs to fight it....


The resistors and those who served it are the heroes....

[tjdee]

28. The politics of the war doesn't really change the bullets, though.

A war is a war.

JFK had just as much a chance of getting killed in WW2 as he did in Vietnam.

Unless I'm misunderstanding your point?

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

67. I think you missed the point

WWII was a necessary and justified war. Vietnam was not. I'd fight to defend our country. I'd never fight in a war like Iraq or Vietnam, when our national security was in no danger.

[papau]

109. What would have done was let the 1954 election in the South take place -

no war would be the result.

but Ike listened to Dulles and the right wing GOP - no election was held because we knew Ho would win -and 60,000 died - and the media never ties VietNam to the GOP.

[AP]

77. JFK was a genuine hero also becuase of what he did in WWII.

From The Smoking Gun:

In New York City, where TSG staffers work and live, heroes are everywhere: firehouses, police precincts, emergency rooms. Sadly, hundreds more are entombed in the twisted wreckage of the World Trade Center, having died trying to rescue their fellow citizens. It was the kind of selflessness for which medals, statues, and proclamations will never suffice. It was the kind of heroism usually reserved for a battlefield (though that's exactly what lower Manhattan now resembles). What follows are records documenting some other famous acts of wartime bravery:


John F. Kennedy's PT 109 heroics (7 pages)

[Warpy]

33. This isn't a hypothetical for a lot of us

Some of us ferried guys to Canada or to the airport for Sweden. Others did draft counseling on how to get CO status (nearly impossible) or how to fake them out and get a 1-Y or 4-F. Some of us hid them in our homes until we could get them out of the country. Some of us visited them in prison and found them jobs when they got out.

The antiwar movement didn't consist of only young men who were about to be drafted. It cut across all segments of society, although the young were the ones who had the leisure time required to mount active protests and marches. For every kid who marched, there were at least 100 people in the background doing everything from writing letters to making signs and posters to writing amateur newspapers to actively doing the things I mentioned above.

[Demobrat]

36. It wasn't a hypothetical for me.

I marched. I lost friends. I still remember the uncertainty and fear like it was yesterday. I remember sitting in my boyfriends car the day he got his draft lottery number (36) with him all night while he cried. (We did get him out of it. See my post below). Which is why I have no respect for anybody who wasn't there and presumes to pass judgement, unless of course they put their money where their mouths are and enlist for Iraq. Then they get to have an opinion, not before.

[slater71]

71. I served. My number was 15.

[Demobrat]

92. I'm glad you made it back OK.

Assuming you did.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

51. Thank you. The folks that are too young to remember that time period...

...are much more prone to see things in absolutes with no shades of gray. Most of us that experienced it know for a fact that it was just about all gray except for the people that got us into it. And they didn't know how to get us out.

[Silverhair]

19. I served and went to Vietnam & I don't apologize to anybody for it. n/t

[Demobrat]

25. I don't think you should apologize for it.

Nor do I believe you deserve any particular respect, any more than I automatically respect cops because they put their lives on the line every day. It's a career choice that people make for lots of different reasons, good and bad. Now, if you lost a limb saving a buddies life, that I would respect. But I would have to know a lot more about you before I considered your military service one way or the other.

[Silverhair]

48. Totally fair. n/t

[Jerseycoa]

27. Nor should you

apologize

[Racenut20]

2. My father told me after I came back

Keep in mind my father was a WWI vet and stood on that front porch and watched as 7 sons and 2 future son-in-laws left for 3 wars.

He told me "If I had known what I know now, I would have put you in the car and taken you to Canada".

Shocked the hell out of me, thats for sure.

Happy Thanksgiving All

[Screaming Lord Byron]

3. I'd have queered out at the Medical. Just like Iggy Pop and Steve Tyler.

Then I would have protested loudly and angrily.

[mlawson]

60. It wasn't that easy.

I had to go for my physical, and I happen to be homosexual, but the thought of trying to get out that way was not a realistic one for me.

We had heard all sorts of stories about what happened if you tried to get out that way: you would NEVER get a decent job, because the military would attach the information *somehow* to your records, etc.

I remember seeing three guys sitting on a bench, during the physical (that took up several hours). They were getting catcalls and threats from many of the examinees; the officers there encouraged it. I do not know if those guys stuck to their strategy, or gave it up. The doctor found that I had some sort of hernia (unbeknowst to me) during the turn your head and cough thing. Within one minute, I had my 4-F, my clothes back on, grinning ear to ear, and looking for a phone to call my buddies to come get me!!!! To say that we partied like hell that night, is wallowing in understatement.

I can not say what I would have done, had I passed the exam. For some reason, I never thought that I would pass it.

[northofdenali]

4. I helped raise the money to send a friend to Canada.

I also sent care packages to two friends who were drafted and went.

The war was incredibly stupid - just like Iraq. I served 4 years in the Air Force and found that almost everyone agreed that Nam was wrong, fought for money (remember Ike's "military-industrial complex"?) and it's still happening.

[tjdee]

6. It's not fair, sorry.

These rich guys who got out of going by gaming the system (and I'm thinking of GWB here)...That is NOT RIGHT. The rich are always able to get out of things, and it's not fair. Why didn't these rich kids go and get an advanced degree, at least? And, poor people couldn't just say "gee, I'll just go to college then."

There is definitely the whole "They died in your place" thing. It's accurate. But war makes cowards, liars, cheats, etc. of everyone, and it's one of those things. I'd rather be a liar than dead for a bullshit war. War isn't pretty for anyone. That's why people who DID go should get that extra bit of respect, IMO. And also, people who actively said NO, I'm not going, like Muhammed Ali. They risked jail. All these people like Rush and Nugent...that's bullshit.

Though, if you're in school, I don't think you should have to drop out to go to war (Clinton should not have been required to drop school). And I don't begrudge them their wanting to avoid it. I would have tried to get out of it. But it's not fair. It's not. And of course, Life isn't fair.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. By Any Moral Calculus

the bravest people were those who served and those who actively resisted....

[Demobrat]

11. You are right. It's not fair.

Which is why when the draft comes back next year there should be no student deferrments at all. At the time there were deferrments for married fathers. Those should be done away with also. If you are in the age group, male or female, and can make it to the induction center under your own steam, you should have to go.

[Rose Siding]

20. Can there still be medical deferrments?

If so, how are they in the same catagory as gaming the system? How is failing a physical for an incontrovertably valid condition dishonorable?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. Of Course Not....

If you're disabled you can't serve....

But lots of rich kids with access to accomodating doctors were provided with the information necessary to get medical deferments...


My best friend's brother couldn't "hear" well enough to be a soldier but it didn't stop him from becoming a cop a couple years later....

He used to laugh about it...

[Demobrat]

32. Actually, it wasn't that easy.

The military doctors didn't take every piece of paper at face value. You still had to go through the physical and if they passed you that was that.

[Demobrat]

30. Yes. Of course there can still be medical deferrments.

Otherwise the military might get stuck providing medical care for people who don't really deserve it.

[iverglas]

49. distinctions to be made

"These rich guys who got out of going by gaming the system (and I'm thinking of GWB here)...That is NOT RIGHT. The rich are always able to get out of things, and it's not fair."

Absolutely. And it's relevant -- *if* the reason they were trying to get out of going was to avoid endangering themselves, while doing nothing but profiting from the system for whose benefit the war was fought.

But being rich and in an expensive school doesn't disqualify someone from having a conscience. A person like that might genuinely believe that a war of imperialist aggression is *wrong*, and not want to participate in it for *that* reason. Should we expect someone to drop out of school and go sign up, so he can get sent over and participate in slaughtering peasants, just because otherwise someone less fortunate would be doing it? What sense does that make?

A person who was opposed to the Vietnam War and attempted not to have to fight in it wasn't trying "to get out of things", he was trying not to aid and abet evil.

"There is definitely the whole 'They died in your place' thing. It's accurate."

It's accurate when it's applied to people who bought their way out of going to Vietnam solely because they didn't want to endanger themselves but did nothing to oppose the war -- but not when applied to people who opposed the war and just happened to have the means to qualify for some exemption.

And even in the first case -- if the war was evil, which it was, what's wrong with not wanting to risk your skin in it? "Selfishness" like that is perfectly sensible and not immoral. The mere fact that someone decides that some peasants in Vietnam need to be dead doesn't make somebody who doesn't happen to feel like killing 'em ignoble. And refusing to risk one's own life to kill people who don't need killing doesn't really make somebody responsible for the fact that someone else was forced to do it.

"That's why people who DID go should get that extra bit of respect, IMO."

What's "why"? I'm not following this at all.

People who went because they believed it was "right" -- were either evil themselves, or deluded. Neither one earns respect. If they were not deluded, fighting in Vietname should earn them contempt; if they were deluded, it should maybe earn them pity.

People who went because they were unable to get out of going, even if they thought it was wrong -- well, it really wasn't that hard to get into Canada. But yes, there are some people who don't have the resources -- financial, social, intellectual -- to resist evil. I'd withhold contempt from them, but I don't quite see any need for respect. Neutrality, and perhaps pity, seems sufficient.

I'm actually at a complete loss to know how a USAmerican who fought in the Vietnam War could possibly deserve respect for doing that. A complete loss.

Yeah, I was around then. I wasn't in the US, but I was involved in anti-war efforts. Apart from how doing that, in itself, didn't really contribute positively to one's career prospects, I did something that could have screwed up my life considerably, to help out a very definitely non-Ivy League type deserter I met, to a large extent specifically because he did not have they options the rich ones had. This discussion therefore isn't completely hypothetical for me.

It's absolutely not fair that the rich should be able to buy exemptions from military service by doing things that the poor are unable to do. There's really no difference between straight lump-sum payments to the government for the exemption, like in the old days, and buying a seat at an expensive school for the duration. It's not fair that it should be easier for a genuine resister to avoid participating in evil if he's rich than if he's poor. But the end result -- one more person whose finger isn't on the trigger of a gun killing innocent people -- is the same.

And it's not fair that resisting will have harsher consequences for some people than for others. It's not fair that I'm a woman, and Canadian, and so didn't have to make any choice at all. But we all play the hands we're dealt every day. And really, is going to jail that much worse than killing people?

.

[G_j]

62. a few distinct

points for me,
-upper middle class upbringing
-first involved in the peace movement at 16
-draft counciling
-applied for CO, was turned down, I appealed
-attended many of the DC marches
-turned 18
-got into school, did school
-called to appear at the draft board (lottery #34)
went through physical, told them that I would not cooperate, they could do what they would, throw me in jail if they wished.
-I was a given a one year repreave (it was the shrink) after which I was to be called again,
-this was the year they abolished the draft.

keep in mind, during this time I was generally more 'political' than my peers.

lucky in many ways
later,
I ended up spending a lot of time
with a friend in the wee drunk hours
who shared enough
that I was never again the same
for hearing from a friend
who could have been me,
stories I had to believe

ah, but for fortune..

in his own words part of him "died there"
so yes, I would say he also died in my place.

Serious business,
and I have to say, WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER LET THIS HAPPEN AGAIN
Bad........Bad.......Bad......

[JackRiddler]

7. sure, I voted "active resistance"

but how the hell would I know, not having been there? Would I have been courageous, or opportunist? The only thing I can say for sure is I would not have gone to Vietnam, under any circumstances, except perhaps as a civilian journalist.

And those who dodged should not be condemned, any more than those who will be dodging when the draft returns. That war was a terrible scam, an obvious scam, an invasion and a crime. No one should have to apologize for saving their skin instead of participating in that crime. And the present war is a new crime, though if one of these was worse it was definitely Vietnam. No excuse whatsoever, for invading to prevent the will of the people there, to replace colonial rule with our own dictator, or for all the other atrocities committed over the course of 20 years. (Let's see how bad the U.S. invasion of Iraq gets, though...)

[catmandu57]

10. Probally been killed in nam

fortunately, I missed the draft. Coming from a working class family there wouldn't have been enough money to scoot. If I made it back alive then I probablly would still be battling ptsd, homelessness, and hunger, and bad treatment from an uncaring VA.

[Demobrat]

13. There was another way.

My boyfriend, who's draft number was 36, got out of it by arranging to be busted with one joint by a friend who was a cop. I was there with the bail money within ten minutes, he spent one night in jail and ended up with 3 years probation and 4-F. Was it worth it? You bet your bootie.

[aeon flux]

12. I don't agree

with this narrow definition of active resistance. In my book any legal means one can use to get out of a heinous immoral/illgal war is fair game. If you can't find a legal way out, then by all means get out of it by any means possible, legal or not. Why should anyone have to die or go to jail for some stupid shit illegal/immoral war that has nothing to do with national security.

[Demobrat]

16. It's easy to pass judgement if you weren't there.

We'll see what happens next year if W gets reinstalled and the draft comes back. I think there were be a lot of tunes changing real fast.

[tjdee]

17. But some people *did* go, that's my thing.

If you're going to try to get out of it, fine. It's human survival. *But* then IMO, you (general you, not you specifically) better be respecting the hell out of people who stepped up to the plate.

People *did* go and get shot and, and die. And many didn't want to go, but couldn't get out of it. That's worth something.

How much honor is there in shitting yourself (like Nugent) and lying about your sexual orientation (Iggy Pop)? I mean, really? But, war is a dirty business. I personally would have done whatever I could to get out of it....but I, like the original poster, have much more respect for the people who actually went, and the people who vocally and loudly refused to go (not by lying or bring doc records, by just saying the war was bullshit).

[Eloriel]

65. Unlike you

I have respect for ALL draft-age young men of my generation, no matter which course they took (except the GWB's and Dan Quayles of the world).

But less respect for those who, like some in today's volunteer military, were truly gung-ho about being in the military and especially about going to war.

It was such a complicated time. As several other posters have pointed out, it's not something that can be so easily demarcated into "good" and "bad" or "right" and "wrong."

AFAIC, going to Canada was every bit as honorable as purposely staying in school or getting a girlfriend pregnant in order to stay home, maybe more so. ANY resistance to that war because it was a lie and no one should have to risk dying for a lie was, IMO, completely honorable. The act of refusing to show up for such a war WAS an act of political courage and activism -- I don't require that they also put themselves in a position to go to jail. That was what some people chose, but I don't require it of all.

IMO, those who, in Iverson's word, were deluded (or just ill-informed) and thought they were doing the right thing by going, whether they were drafted or enlisted, were also honorable. They THOUGHT they were doing the right thing. I honor them for that.

In THAT war, IMO, there were no dishonorable parts. (Okay, the Lt. Calley's, the senior officers who lied about our "successes," the people who sent my generation to war -- those were the dishonorable roles.)

No one can possibly know or understand unless they lived through that time. It tore the country apart, and it was a sad and horrible and frightening time (where the war was concerned -- other parts of that era were fine, marvelous, exciting and hopeful).

There are still vets who believe they did the right thing by going, and that the war was the right thing. They're not deluded, they're in denial. The way I figure it is, they have to be. They would't be able to deal with their rage and sense of betrayal if they allowed themselves to acknowledge and really know that it was a waste in every conceivable way, and all that which our country made them do and experience was completely for naught. I can't fault them. It's psychological self-protection and none of us has any right to insist they let go of it.

No, I honor them all, without reservation.

Eloriel

[RichardRay]

14. How about serve and actively resist?

While on active duty in the military I helped operate a counseling and outreach center and did organizing work. We focused on providing information and counseling for those in the military who no longer wished to be there and to those who would complete their terms of service and return to the workplace.

I didn't manage to complete my own term of service, but that was my commanding officer's choice, not mine :-).

[Beaker]

21. I was born 4-F.

I tried to get into the navy once...I took the Armed Forces Entrance Exam(or whatever it was called- this was over 25 years ago) and I got the highest score that my recruiter had ever seen. He started to push the nuclear sub option on me pretty hard...but when I went to Glenview for a physical, I was denied- due to a slightly deformed right-hand.

But, all things being equal, if my number came up I would have served, although I probably would have tried for the Navy or the Coast Guard first.

[dand]

22. I served, USMC (stateside)

I am proud of my service.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

26. I would have done WHATEVER it took not to go

I pass NO judgements about what those who avoided going did with the exception of those that would GLADLY start another Viet Nam or defend that war while THEY chickened out serving in it.

I remember that war. IT was my first dose of reality as a child and its images were a source of great disturbance.

[Scott Lee]

29. I would have insisted that General Westmoreland go too.

That would have insured my stay stateside.

[lumpy]

31. Questions like this really get to me,

when I think of the 15 an 16 year old men who were turned away by the recruiters during WW2, one of my brothers included. It was a justifiable war and the US was united in the effort. Different time different wars.
Most people I knew were actively against the Vietnam war. I knew some young men who did anything available to stay out of the draft and I supported their decisions. My daughters fiance came up with a low number. He ate a helluva lot(bananas work well), managed to get quite overweight and was rejected. A nephew was a conscencious objecter(religious reasons), when he was religious, that is. His father practically disowned him. Now the nephew is in favor with the Iraq war and a Bush supporter. I just shake my head and hold my tongue.

[Zynx]

34. I'm not going to pretend I'm a hero. I would've found some way to get out.

I think many people here are lying because I don't believe 50% would have served. I would have gotten a medical deferment for something or other. I have a number of possible health problems.

[dkf]

35. I just put a poll up asking the same question in relation to Iraq.

To me, the question is pretty much the same thing as I see Vietnam and Iraq in a similar light.

[Myra]

38. Can't argue with that

They're cut out of the same cloth.

[dkf]

42. I don't get it. My poll only has 1 person who would go with the draft

and 10 people who wouldn't with 0 people trying to get a deferrment.

What is the difference here?

[Beaker]

52. But the times have changed.

I would have probably served if drafted during vietnam, I don't have children, but if I did- I wouldn't want them to go the military route, and I would try to do whatever I could to keep them out of a draft for a war in the middle-east.

[durutti]

117. One Big Difference

In Vietnam (at least in the later years of the war), there was active resistance by soldiers. People refused to obey. Officers got fragged. So I could see allowing yourself to get drafted in order to participate in the military-based resistance.

In Iraq, there's no such resistance, at least not yet.

[loudnclear]

37. What was the actual outcome of our not "winning?"

Seems to me that things are pretty much not a haven for 'terrorists.'
We are actually on friendly terms with our former enemy...just like our relationship with Russis. Can't people see that war is a useless carnage against mankind?

[TexasMexican]

39. Join the Coast Guard.

Do some good domestically.

[TahitiNut]

74. U.S. Coast Guardsmen served in Vietnam

8,000 served, 7 were KIA, 60 were wounded

---

LTJG David C. Brostrum, commanding officer of the Point Welcome , was killed in action on 11 August 1966.

EN2 Jerry Phillips, of the Point Welcome , was killed in action on 11 August 1966.

LT Jack Rittichier, a Coast Guard exchange pilot attached to the U.S. Air Force's 37th Aerospace & Recovery Squadron, was killed in action on 9 June 1968.

FN Heriberto S. Hernandez, of the Point Cypress , was killed in action during small boat operations on the Ca Mau Peninsula on 5 December 1968.

ENC Morris S. Beeson, on the Point Orient , was killed in action during a boarding on 22 March 1969.

EN1 Michael H. Painter was killed in action by a mortar explosion on board the Point Arden on 9 August 1969.

LTJG Michael W. Kirkpatrick was killed in action by a mortar explosion on board the Point Arden on 9 August 1969. LTJG Kirkpatrick was the executive officer of the Point Arden.

---

Robert J. Yered

Engineman First Class Robert J. Yered was awarded the Silver Star for action on 18 February 1968 while attached to Explosive Loading Detachment #1, Cat Lai, Republic of Vietnam. EN1 Yered was supervising the loading of explosives on board an ammunition ship when an enemy rocket struck a barge loaded with several tons of mortar ammunition moored alongside. His citation noted that "without regard for his personal safety, exposed himself to the enemy fusillade as he helped extinguish the fire on the burning barge. . .His courageous act averted destruction of the ammunition ship, and the Army Terminal." EN1 Yered also received the Purple Heart for injuries suffered during the incident.

[izzie]

40. Oh I would have gone at that time in my life.

I was wed to a 20 year Navy man. But and this was slow building, we all men and women were starting to see things very wrong with things but that was mid-60's.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. Honorable?

"IMHO, these were the two honorable choices a brave man who had physical as well as moral courage could have chosen...."

You make it sound as if the choices were only about one's personal safety.

Is it "honorable" to go and kill people because some politician thinks it's a good idea to prove that he's "anti-communist".

Is it "honorable" to burn down villages because it will help enrich somebody who will profit from the war?

Is it "honorable" to drop bombs on civilians because you joined the Air Force so you could learn to fly and become a commercial pilot later?

Is it "honorable" to kill anyone, man, woman, or child, because some moron has declared the area a "free fire zone"?

"Honorable" my ass.

In 1965 I refused to extend my enlistment to go to Vietnam. It wasn't because I was afraid for my personal safety, it was because I refused to murder people because LBJ wanted to prove he had a big jockstrap.

USMC - 1961-'65

[Demobrat]

43. Thank you for that.

I hated the way some of the returning soldiers were reviled and called babykillers, because so many went against their will, but I sure don't consider anybody a hero who kills people to further their career.

[iverglas]

50. shoulda read yours first ;)

Nothing honourable about any of those things at all -- just what I meant when I said up above that there was nothing about going to Vietnam in the US military that deserved respect.

"It wasn't because I was afraid for my personal safety, it was because I refused to murder people because LBJ wanted to prove he had a big jockstrap."

Exactly, and the same can be said of many of the people who used the money that paid their university tuition to stay out of the military.

The poorer ones got dealt the harsher hand, because they had to choose between going to Vietnam and going to jail, or leaving their lives behind. But the ones who managed to avoid serving evil by staying in school got dealt the hand that enables people to call them cowardly or selfish for what they did.

There's nothing wrong with doing what's right even when it's more fun than doing what's wrong. It's still right.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

58. Do You Mean

Bill Bennett

Rushy Limbaugh

George Will

Pat Buchanan

Newt Gingrich

J Danforth Quayle

Saxby Chambliss

George Walker Bush

gamed the system out of respect for Asian life.....

Maybe it was because they had a alot of respect for their own....

I already admitted I would have probably gamed the system too.....

But it wouldn't have been for noble reasons....

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. Respect for Asian life?

Those dolts only have respect for their own ambitions.

"I already admitted I would have probably gamed the system too.....

But it wouldn't have been for noble reasons...."

Why not? Are you saying that you would be willing to kill people (or, at least Asians) if there was no risk to yourself?

[iverglas]

61. why would you ask this?

"Do You Mean Bill Bennett ... gamed the system out of respect for Asian life....."

Why would anyone suggest that saying "some Xs are Y" means "All Ys are X"?

Some people with blond hair have blue eyes. Are you now going to ask whether I mean that all blue-eyed people have blond hair?

SOME people who opposed the war used the means available to them to avoid going to Vietnam in the US military.

Does that mean that ALL people who used the means available to them to avoid going to Vietnam in the US military opposed the war?

NO. Why would you even ask the question?

"I already admitted I would have probably gamed the system too.....
But it wouldn't have been for noble reasons...."

So what?

The poster you are replying to "gamed the system" by exploiting his exemption from having to go to Vietnam (having already completed military service). He did it because he opposed the war.

I just don't get it. What the hell *should* he have done? Gone to Vietnam so that no one could accuse him of "gaming the system"?

One doesn't actually need a "noble reason" for refusing to do something evil, you know. It is perfectly acceptable to refuse to do something evil because one does not want to break a fingernail. No one is actually required to have a good reason for deciding that one doesn't want to risk breaking a fingernail doing something that should not be done.

Maybe if some people had had the choice of jail or Vietnam, instead of school or Vietnam, they would have chosen Vietnam. In many cases, we'll never know what they would have done. They themselves may not know what they would have done.

I don't feel competent to guess and then condemn them as selfish and unprincipled based on my guess, personally. I don't even know what I'd do if faced with some really hard choices I can imagine. Drill my teeth, and I can't guarantee I won't betray you all. Do you now get to condemn me too?

However, I think we can guess what Rush Limbaugh would have done.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. If You Reread My Original Post

you would see what my argument is...

Then you can decide to refute my argument or attribute to me an argument I never made and refute that...

I will admit the latter is much easier....


I'll repeat my argument....

If you were called and served you earned the respect of your peers...


If you opposed the war then the honorable path was to apply for conscientious objector status and subject yourself to imprisonment if it was denied.....

Many Quakers, Jehovahs Witnesses, and pacifists did just that....

I don't see how someone who gamed the system by lying about their sexual orientation, their health or artificially altering it, or getting student or other kinds of deferments can be on the same moral plane as those who suffered greatly fighting in it or actually opposing it....

Here's three hypotheticals....

John Bullman,a poor Native American from Black Wells, Oklahoma,gets his notice to serve in Nam... He serves, gets wounded and returns a double amputee....

David Stafford, a middle America kid from Lincoln, Nebraska, gets his notice to serve, applies for conscientious objector status,has it denied, and serves five years in prison...

This is delicious.....

Cedric Phillips, a upper income kid from Grosse Pointe, Michigan, gets his notice to serve, and promptly enrolls in college rather than take the year off he had planned to see Europe so he could get his deferment....

You could boil me in fucking oil but I would never put Mr. Phillips on the same plane as Mr.'s Stafford and Bullman...

P.S. I already admitted I would have probably gamed the system too but I am honest enough with myself to know I ain't made of the same stuff that folks like John Kerrey, Wes Clark, and Max Cleland who fought in the war or folk likes like the Jehovahs Witnesses, the Quakers, and pacifists who refused to serve...

That's why we have heroes.... Not to distinguish them from cowards but to distinguish them from the vast lot of us who are merely mortal....

[iverglas]

69. or you could answer my question

It was:

The poster you are replying to "gamed the system" by exploiting his exemption from having to go to Vietnam (having already completed military service). He did it because he opposed the war.

I just don't get it. What the hell *should* he have done? Gone to Vietnam so that no one could accuse him of "gaming the system"?

Or let's take your example:

Cedric Phillips, a upper income kid from Grosse Pointe, Michigan, gets his notice to serve, and promptly enrolls in college rather than take the year off he had planned to see Europe so he could get his deferment....

Let us assume that Cedric opposed the atrocity that was the US invasion of Vietnam. I see two things that he could have done besides this:

(a) enrol in the military, go to Vietnam, and kill people;

(b) sit at home waiting for the military to come and get him, refuse to go to Vietnam, and go to jail.

Forgive me, but I reject option (a). If he did that because he supported the US aggression against Vietnam, he might have been evil or deluded, who knows, but if he did it when he opposed that aggression, well, I guess he'd also be evil (if he participated in order to avoid jail time, which also strikes me as stupid, as I've said).

Option (b)? Well, I'm afraid that would just make Cedric stupid. Who in their right mind would go to jail for doing something when s/he doesn't have to go to jail for it?

Okay, there's an option (c): get out on the streets and fight the war before going to jail for resisting the draft.

That might be more admirable than enrolling in university. Just as it might be more admirable to take the homeless guy on the corner home with you than to walk on by. But walking on by is still more admirable than kicking him.

We're generally satisfied if people walk on by the homeless guy without kicking him; we don't berate them for not taking him home and giving him free room and board for the next five years.

I'm satisfied if someone who opposed the US atrocity in Vietnam didn't participate in it.

When you walk by the homeless guy, you don't have to decide among take him home, walk on by, kick him. There's option (d): walk on by, but also give him a buck; or option (e): walk on by, but also volunteer at the shelter, campaign for candidates who vow to implement economic policies to benefit him. Do that, and I'm more likely to actually think positively of you than if you just walk on by.

So Cedric could have enrolled in university *and* actively participated in anti-war efforts, at some expense to himself in time, money and career prospects. And yup, I would feel think more positively of him then than if he just enrolled in university.

But even if he just enrolled in university and did nothing else, he still wasn't kicking the homeless guy, and that still gets more of my approval than someone who did.

So what should Cedric have done?

And if you say he should have stayed out of school, refused to go to Vietnam, and gone to jail, then explain to me why you don't take the homeless guy on the corner home with you. Why you think that it is only acceptable to do the right thing if you suffer in the process. Why, say, someone with a serious medical condition who opposed the Vietnam War shouldn't have refused to take a medical, refused to take the easy way out that the medical problem offered him, and insisted on going to jail instead. I mean, I assume that this is what you think he should have done.

"P.S. I already admitted I would have probably gamed the system too but I am honest enough with myself to know I ain't made of the same stuff that folks like John Kerrey, Wes Clark, and Max Cleland who fought in the war or folk likes like the Jehovahs Witnesses, the Quakers, and pacifists who refused to serve..."

Well, if you think you know what you'd do in the situation, you just keep on speaking for yourself and yourself only -- and refrain from insisting that the moral standards that you base on this self-knowledge of yours be applied by others -- howzat?

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. You Seem To Be Embracing A Moral Calculus

even as you seem to be rejecting one....


Answer my question....


Is Cedric Phillips the moral inferior to the poor Native American kid who lacked the means to escape the draft and was seriously wounded and the middle American kid who opposed the draft and paid for his opposition with his freedom...


"Who in their right mind would go to jail for doing something when s/he doesn't have to go to jail for it?


HEROES.....

I guess by your calculus Muhammad Ali was a sucker.... He could have entered the draft and fought some exhibition fights for the USO and he would have never been in harms way.... That was the deal that was offered to him... The U.S. government wasn't going to use the heavyweight champion of the world as cannon fodder...

The college kids who went to Mississippi during Freedom Summer to register black folks to vote were suckers too....They risked life and limb and freedom for "doing something" they weren't compelled to do...

THEY WERE HEROES..

"The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in a time of great moral conflict."

-Martin Luther King



If I see a woman being raped and walk on by I am still morally superior to the rapist but am the moral inferior to the man who risks his life to stop it....


Do you reject the concept of a moral calculus?

[iverglas]

78. cute

"Is Cedric Phillips the moral inferior to the poor Native American kid who lacked the means to escape the draft and was seriously wounded and the middle American kid who opposed the draft and paid for his opposition with his freedom..."

The real question is: why do you ask?

What have I said that would make you think that I thought he WAS "morally inferior", or superior, to either of them?

I can't be judged "morally inferior" to someone who jumped into the icy St. Lawrence to save someone's life if I have never been faced with the choice of doing or not doing that.

Not, of course, unless it is a rule that I should abandon my home and job and spend my life patrolling the shores of the St. Lawrence, so that I might be present when someone falls in, and try to rescue him/her, and I have failed to do that.

And if I did that, would I then be "morally superior" to someone who didn't?

What if I make very sure never to get near the St. Lawrence in winter, so that I will never be faced with the choice in question? What if someone drowns whom I could have saved if I'd been there? What if you chose never to go out at night so that your chances of encountering someone being assaulted and having to decide whether to risk your life to save them were greatly reduced? What if you decided never to go out at night to protect your SELF from the risk of assault, and someone was killed whom you might have saved if you'd been there?

Our Cedric did not have to choose between killing someone and going to jail. I have never had to choose between saving someone or letting him/drown. How can either of us be judged -- for not going to jail, for not saving someone's life -- if we were never put to the test?

Why is simply not wanting to lose one's life for no reason (go to Vietnam and get killed and do nothing good at all) or ruin one's life for no reason (go patrol the shores of the St. Lawrence and accomplish nothing) or endanger one's life for no reason (go out at night when one has no need to) a reason to be judged "morally inferior" to anyone?

There was no reason good enough to choose to go to Vietnam. No reason was needed by anyone for not going.

With the caveat that if someone thought there was good enough reason for someone else to go to Vietnam, then s/he did need a good reason for not going, obviously.

I have already clearly stated in this thread that I do not judge anyone who is so oppressed that s/he is manipulated into serving the interests of the oppressor, against both his/her own interests and the interests of others, to be necessarily someone who "chose" to go to Vietnam.

You assert that your "poor Native American" lacked the means to escape the draft. A recent post in this thread went on at length about how members of the military have no choice about what they do. Neither one is true. There is ALWAYS the choice to REFUSE. There are consequences attached to the choice, but THERE IS A CHOICE.

The only situation in which I might agree that there was no choice is when the individual in question is not aware that there is a choice to be made: in this instance, was not aware that there were reasons not to go to Vietnam -- was so oppressed that s/he did not realize that going to Vietnam meant absolutely nothing but participating in his/her own oppression and the oppression of others. Yes, I accept that possibility. No, I would not judge that person to be "morally inferior" to someone who saw the choices and made the right one.

But I also do not judge such a person to be "morally superior". If the person is not RESPONSIBLE for the choice s/he made, and therefore cannot be judged negatively for making it, how the hell can s/he be judged positively for making it??

Any of these various individuals might be judged as morally inferior or superior to any of the others for a whole host of other reasons. Maybe one houses homeless people, one passes them by, and one kicks them. Maybe one actively resisted the Vietnam War at some greater or lesser personal expense, one sat it out, and one rescued others from harm in the thick of it at great personal expense.

But none of those things has anything to do with the choice as to whether to participate in that war or not. Those who chose to do it, knowing what the choice was and what their choice meant, were thereby evil. Those who did it without understanding that there was a choice, or what the nature of the choices was, were simply "neutral": there is no moral value attached to such an action. Those who refused to go were not thereby evil. That's it.

Obviously there are many cases that fell into grey areas between those possibilities. I think long and hard before characterizing people in those grey areas as evil, and I very seldom do it. But I also do NOT characterize them as admirable based on their having done something that I regard them as not responsible for.

And therein lies my whole problem with asserting that one is "proud" of, and "supports", people doing things that I regard as reprehensible who are said, in the same breath, as the pride and support, to be not responsible for what they are doing. It's a nonsense, of the moral and any other kind you like.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

80. We're Making This Much More Difficult...

If you thought the war was wrong why be "cute" about it and game the system...

Why not say "I ain't got no quarrel with the Viet Nam" and refuse to be inducted like Ali did.....

He was a h-e-r-o.... He was willing to risk his freedom and livelihood to oppose the war.....

He could have done what Joe Louis did in WW2... Fought a bunch of exhibition fights in lieu of going into combat....

He was offered such an arrangement and refused.... He knew the war was wrong and didn't want to lend his credibility to it...

If there were more Ali's and less kids gaming the system maybe the Viet Nam Wall would have been a lot smaller...

His actions, the condemnation of the war by Dr. King helped to galvanzie the opposition...

As Burke said" all it takes for evil to triumph is for men of good will to do nothing."

S-o-r-r-y... I have alot more respect for folks like Ali who risked all to oppose the war than folks who sat it out in college or the National Guard....

All your intellectual gymnastics obscure the real point which I believe was your intent that the hypotheticals I created represented real groups of people who made real choices...

Some were simply h-e-r-o-i-c and some were acts of self preservation...

[iverglas]

85. nope, I'm keeping it simple

"Why not say 'I ain't got no quarrel with the Viet Nam' and refuse to be inducted like Ali did....."

Why are you suggesting that Ali joining the military and not going to Vietnam is somehow equivalent, morally or otherwise, to not joining the military?

"He was offered such an arrangement and refused.... He knew the war was wrong and didn't want to lend his credibility to it..."

Why are you suggesting that someone who stayed out of the military by staying in school was somehow "lending his credibility" to the war?

"If there were more Ali's and less kids gaming the system maybe the Viet Nam Wall would have been a lot smaller..."

Maybe that's true.

But it's for damned sure at least equally true that if there had been more kids refusing to go to Vietnam who in fact went to Vietnam the wall would have been a lot shorter.

Why are you picking on the ones who didn't go and blaming them for what was done by the ones who went?

*I* am not necessarily blaming any individuals among the ones who went. I have made that absolutely clear.

"As Burke said 'all it takes for evil to triumph is for men of good will to do nothing'."

But hey, it sure helps if there are some men of bad will doing something evil, don't you think?

"S-o-r-r-y... I have alot more respect for folks like Ali who risked all to oppose the war than folks who sat it out in college or the National Guard...."

And I simply do not base my respect, or lack thereof, for anyone on whether or not they actively opposed the war in Vietnam irrespective of any other factors. Just as I do not base my respect, or lack thereof, for you on whether you have rescued anyone from the icy St. Lawrence recently.

Not going to Vietnam does not earn disrespect unless some other factor is present. Not going to Vietnam, in and of itself, earns more respect than going to Vietnam, in and of itself, where all other factors are equal.

And you can keep your silly sorries.

"All your intellectual gymnastics obscure the real point which I believe was your intent that the hypotheticals I created represented real groups of people who made real choices...

You're trying very hard to sell me some oranges when I have told you I want apples. Not that I'd necessarily call your gymnastics "intellectual". And if you are unable to determine my real point from what I've written, kindly ask me, and keep your nasty insinuations to yourself.

The heroism of your war heroes occurred AFTER they chose (if that is what they did) to go to Vietnam. It has NOTHING TO DO with the choice to go to Vietnam. It is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to any consideration of the morality of their choice to go to Vietnam. And THAT is what this discussion is about. I'm not going to get dragged into some interminable philosophy exam discussion of whether someone who went to war but rescued his buddy is "morally superior" to someone who resisted the war and housed a homeless person. The point is that unless you're willing to dredge up all the possible moral/immoral things that any of the parties in question did, for purposes of comparison, you don't get to drag war "heroism" into it.

And in all bloody likelihood, to be perfectly frank, that "war heroism" was completely cancelled out, in the moral balance, by the other and reprehensible things they did while in Vietnam. Find me a Vietnam "war hero" who didn't slaughter a few peasants, and I'll go lightly on him.

"Some were simply h-e-r-o-i-c and some were acts of self preservation..."

There is NOTHING IMMORAL about acts of self-preservation, where they are not committed at someone else's expense. They are simply neutral.

And goddamn it, if we're blaming the big shots for what the boys and girls are "having to do" in Iraq right now, how come we get to blame the little fellas for what the big shots did to their peers in the Vietnam era?

How dare you say that people who "gamed the system" to stay out of a war they opposed preserved themselves at the expense of someone else, when you do not say the same about people who obey orders to participate in the atrocity in Iraq? They're "preserving themselves" from getting thrown in jail, right? They're doing it by being parties to the killing of innocent people -- they're preserving themselves at the expense of those people. Is it okay because the latter are doing it at the expense only of non-USAmericans? Can I think of some other explanation? Not at the moment.

Surely the number of names on that wall are the fault of the US governments that prosecuted that war, not of the people who did not participate in it. By your own logic, if nothing else.

How come you let those boys and girls in Iraq off scot free, and in fact praise them, for doing evil things, and yet you will condemn those who did nothing in the Vietnam era except preserve themselves for doing nothing?

Why do you compare the Vietnam-era do-nothings unfavourably to Mohammed Ali, and yet compare the Iraq-era evil-doers unfavourably to no one?

I think I'm giving up.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. I'll Give You Two Concrete Examples

without embellishment or editorial comment.....


Dick Cheney who said he supported the war got six deferments, the first four or five were college deferments, and the others were marriage or children deferments...

or

Muhammad Ali, who vociferoulsy opposed the war and refused induction and was found guilty of a felony* and stripped of his heavyweight title and was not allowed to practice his trade (prizefight) for three and one half years... He also couldn't fight overseas because his passport was taken away...


Who was the hero? And who was whose moral superior?


* A felony conviction which was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court in 1970 but not until the prime years of his boxing career were gone... He couldn't box from ages 25-28....

[iverglas]

87. and I'll reject your loaded question

You've switched horses in mid-stream, my friend, and I ain't following.

We have not been talking about Dick Cheney. We have not been talking about people who supported the war, and supported sending others to fight it, but opted out of participating themselves.

Your question is loaded because you are obviously trying to present Cheney as the subject of our discussion, and I will not dignify that false premise with a response.

The question is:

An ordinary person who opposed the war, and got deferments for whatever reasons were available to him, in order not to have to risk his life doing something he found reprehensible.

Muhammad Ali, who vociferoulsy opposed the war and refused induction and was found guilty of a felony and stripped of his heavyweight title and was not allowed to practice his trade (prizefight) for three and one half years... He also couldn't fight overseas because his passport was taken away...

Who was the hero? And who was whose moral superior?

And the answer: I don't have a clue.

Because I don't know anything else about the ordinary person in question, and so I am in no position to compare his moral standing to anyone else's. If he protested the war instead of playing ball, housed the homeless at his own expense, rescued drowning people at risk to his own life, adopted stray cats and disabled children, and always took public transportation, HE might well be Ali's moral superior. I DON'T KNOW.

On the sole issue of the "morality" of their choices in respect of the participating in the Vietnam War -- they are both not evil. That's all I know, and all I say.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

96. We all know what archetypes are....

Several posts ago I offered three archetypes....


archetype- the original model or pattern of all things of the same type

Save your little sophisty and casuistry about a million other sundry factors... An archetype is an archetype

The poor Indian kid from Black Wells, Oklahaoma who was yanked off his wretched reservation to serve in Nam and came back an amputee... He didn't have an "out" and they called them Indians not Native Americans back then....


The Middle America kid from Lincoln, Nebraska who sought conscientious objector status and was denied it and served prison time....

The rich kid from Grosse Ponite, Michigan who "gave up" his high school graduation present of a year in Europe to go to college to get a college deferment so he could avoid the draft....

"I don't know anything about the ordinary person in question"

For the sake of argument the "ordinary person in question" could give a shit about the rightness of the war.... He just wanted to save his own skin so he could go to college and smoke as much dope as possible and deflower as many willing virgins that would accommodate him... When he wasn't doing that he was shoplifting from local stores cuz he liked the thrill...

Does that assist you with my hypothetical?

[iverglas]

98. big bad words

... and people who mistakenly (?) think they're useful.

"they called them Indians not Native Americans back then...."

Uh, my dear, YOU called this individual "Native American", if what you're getting at is my use of the term. I used it only in deference to you. *I* call "them" First Nations people, or Aboriginal persons. Dunno what your problem is, gotta say.

And y'know, I just don't give a shit about your archetypes, howzat?

Your archetypes are still a barrel of apples and oranges for the purpose for which you are using them. How about I throw in the archetype of the tart with the heart of gold for good measure? And we can size her up for "moral inferiority" or "moral superiority" next your archetypes of choice.

"For the sake of argument the 'ordinary person in question' could give a shit about the rightness of the war.... He just wanted to save his own skin so he could go to college and smoke as much dope as possible and deflower as many willing virgins that would accommodate him... When he wasn't doing that he was shoplifting from local stores cuz he liked the thrill..."

Nah, it just bores me a little more. And since I've been told nothing new about your First Nations guy archetype, I still don't have any basis for comparison. And since I would never be in a position to judge either one of them anyhow, since I could pretty much never have all the information I'd need to judge them and I don't make a practice of judging people based on my own imperfect perceptions of them, we're still just wasting my time.

You seem to think that your own perceived moral weakness entitles you to impute moral weakness to others and then judge 'em. You would be ashamed of yourself for "just" getting out of going to an evil war, and not making some big brave bold statement and getting yourself into all sorts of shit at the same time, but you still wouldn't do what you'd have to do in order not to be ashamed. I don't know what childhood problem this little conundrum might stem from, and I don't really care.


Apples

A person who did not go to Vietnam with the US military because he opposed the war, who used any means available for that purpose: did right.

A person who did not go to Vietnam with the US military because he didn't want to break a fingernail: committed a morally neutral act.

A person who did go to Vietnam with the US military because he did not understand that he had a choice, and what his choices were: committed a morally neutral act.

A person who went to Vietnam with the US military because he supported the war, and whose choice was informed and voluntary: did wrong.

Oranges

A person who actively opposed the US government's war against Vietnam: did right.

A person who rescued a comrade, or a Vietnamese child, from death in the war, or who refused to follow an order to commit an atrocity in that war: did right.

A person who housed the homeless, rescued a drowning person, or adopted a disabled child, did right.


How's that for moral calculus?

Apples and oranges may not be randomly swapped and added and subtracted and multiplied, and no amount of your sleight of hand will get me to try to figure out which shell the pea is under.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. " I Don't Know What Childhood Problem This Little Conundrum Might

Stem From, and I really don't care"..

ROTFLMFAO....

That sounds like something that was probably said to you many a times...

I'd almost pay to meet you.... Say a couple hundred bucks to you're favorite charity to see if you're as much of a toolbox in real person as you are on screen...


Love and Kisses,

Brian

P.S. We all make choices every day... Some are mundane.... And some involve decisions which can be measured on a moral calcus.....

edited for punctuation and to add kisses to my love...

[iverglas]

106. arithmetic only works

... when:

- you don't pretend that you can add 2x and 2y and get 4 without knowing what x and y are

- you don't pretend that you can add 2 and 2 and throw in a couple of xs and ys for which the value is unknown and still get 4

That's another way of saying "apples and oranges", y'see.

And a joke is only a joke when it's funny. Dog knows what you're rolling around on the floor in all that pseudo-hilarity about.

We all make choices every day... Some are mundane.... And some involve decisions which can be measured on a moral calcus.....

Gee. Remind me to give you a call next time I need some chicken soup for my soul.

I'd just offer my advice, again, that you stop trying to pretend that you can put your thumb on the scale when it comes to some people's "moral" decisions and still get a valid result when you put them in the balance with others'.

If you are going to factor in decisions OTHER THAN whether or not to participate in the US military effort in Vietnam in doing your little calculation, then you have to factor in ALL decisions other than whether or not to participate in the US military effort in Vietnam.

So you can just tell me, anytime you're ready:

As between Muhammed Ali and the college kid who "gamed the system" to stay out of Vietnam and also housed the homeless man in his own home, fed the hungry woman and went hungry himself, and adopted the disabled child and gave up a lucrative career to care for her, but never stood up against US actions in Vietnam, who wins the gold star?

I like my college kid better than yours. I might even like him better than I like Muhammed Ali.

But all three of 'em stayed the hell out of Vietnam, and that's what we're talking about.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

108. When You Add Those Factors To The Hypothetical

than the person who gamed the system did lots of things that are admirable and worthy of praise and admiration...

But we were discussing archetypes which physical as well as social scientists find uselful and without which they'd be lost.....

Of course, no two people are exactly alike but behavior typically falls in clusters.....

We are unique........ To a Degree......

My simple point which seems to have gotten lost with all your dialectical derring -doo is that folks who actively opposed the war, w-i-t-h a-l-l t-h-i-n-g-s b-e-i-n-g equal were the moral superiors to those who gamed the system and passively resisted it....

As Dr. King said when discussing the white ministers and rabbis in the 1960's south who opposed segreagation but were reluctant to give voice to their opposition that "the hottest place in Hell was reserved for those who remain neutral in a time of great moral conflict."

[iverglas]

113. this is a binary system

You're doing exactly what the anti-choice brigade does when it refers to "three choices" facing a pregnant woman:
- terminate the pregnancy;
- continue the pregnancy and rear the child;
- continue the pregnancy and relinquish the child for adoption.

There are TWO choices facing a pregnant woman:
- terminate the pregnancy;
- continue the pregnancy.

If the anti-choice get to throw in "and do this", then I get to throw in "and do that": continue the pregnancy, and beat the child for the next ten years; continue the pregnancy, and get beaten by the child's father for the next ten years; etc. etc. etc.


There are TWO choices facing a person about to be drafted into a military venture:
- go;
- don't go.

Everything else is else.

You can toss around your archetypes from here to eternity. You simply do NOT get to decide WHICH archetypes to toss in.

"folks who actively opposed the war, w-i-t-h a-l-l t-h-i-n-g-s b-e-i-n-g equal were the moral superiors to those who gamed the system and passively resisted it...."

Dandy. And folks who gamed the system and also housed the homeless, fed the hungry and adopted the disabled, all other things being equal, are morally superior to folks who actively opposed the war and didn't lift a finger to help another human being.

Get *your* finger off the scale. You simply do not get to add ingredients to one bowl but not to the other, and then pronounce that you're locking the door and all other things must be equal.

I just can't get over your inability/refusal to distinguish an apple from an orange, and your attempts to toss 3s and 7s into a binary system on one side only.

THIS is "all other things being equal":
You have perfect knowledge of what is happening in the US and in Vietnam, and completely a functioning brain, and no personality disorders.
- Go to Vietnam: bad.
- Don't go to Vietnam: good.

Where two people have identical experiences, resources, abilities, genes, etc. etc., both refuse to go to Vietnam, but one chooses to sit on his hands and benefit from exemptions while the other chooses to actively protest the war at risk to himself, and neither does anything else at all about anything else at all, and we know nothing about motives and possible personal costs/benefits from the decision:
- # 1 is good;
- # 2 is better.

But those are not the choices available in response to the choice "go to Vietnam, don't go to Vietnam". The choices available are "go, don't go".

Just as "childrearing, adoption" are not choices available in response to pregnancy.

To get back to the original sheep, you said:

"There seemed to be several options a young man who was drafted or subject to the draft in Viet Nam could have chosen...."

... and listed your faves. You omitted "pick his nose".

There are not "several options". There are two options -- or an infinite number of options. Either focus on the two relevant options, or include all of the infinite number.

Your three were:

- "serve" (a loaded word, by the way, not acceptable when asking people to choose their own fave in a poll)
- "actively resist"
- "game the system" (more loaded words)

You went on to load the third option further by disparaging certain practitioners of it.

From the things you say, one might expect you to know better than to load the question you're asking, even if you don't ask the right question. (Yup, the actual poll questions were less biased; that doesn't excuse the loaded context.)

You lumped "Clinton, Dean, Quayle, Bush2, Cheney, Lieberman" in one disparaged bundle as if there were no differences among them that are relevant to a "moral calculus".

You completely invalidated your outcomes by mixing incomparables in the question:
- people who "served" regardless of what their reasons were (plus you expressed bias in favour of them);
- people who refused to "serve" for altruistic reasons that they acted on;
- people who refused to "serve" either for no "good" reason or without acting on those reasons.

Then you muddied it up some more by tossing in the non-responsible victim-"server", whose reasons for going to war were neither good nor bad. You went beyond apples and oranges to pomegranates.

Here is an all "other things being equal" calculation:

- supported the aims of the war, went to Vietnam: bad
- supported the aims of the war, got out of going, did nothing else: neutral
- didn't know anything about the aims of the war, didn't know there was the option of not going, went: neutral
- didn't care about the aims of the war or whether it succeeded, didn't want to break a fingernail, got out of going: neutral
- opposed the aims of the war, didn't go, did nothing else: neutral
- opposed the aims of the war, didn't go, actively resisted the war: good

I've rounded things off for convenience. The 2nd option may be more bad than neutral; the 3rd may contain a bit of bad and/or good; the 4th and 5th more good than neutral. The scale is different from what I used in the 1-2 dichotomy above.

It includes all basic possibilities, not just a select few. It addresses motives, choice made about going to the war, and support/oposition for the war, in all cases, not just a select few. It doesn't impose responsibility on people for things they cannot reasonably be held responsible for, on an equal basis (the exploited one who went is not responsible for the children he killed, the uninterested one who stayed is not responsible for the others who had to go being killed; in both cases, the people running the show get the responsibility).

The fact that you were asking people what *they* would do obscured the other options that must be considered when doing that 'moral calculus' in respect of what people actually did.

"the hottest place in Hell was reserved for those who remain neutral in a time of great moral conflict."

And you know as well as I do that this was rhetoric, hyperbole, and that King no more believed that the blank faces in front of him were more evil and more culpable than the people committing the evil they wished to remain neutral about than I do.

And it is absolutely disingenuous to use rhetoric like that to support the assertion that anyone who did not go to Vietnam and kill innocent people but did nothing to resist the war is more evil than someone who chose, with full knowledge and no diminished responsibility, to go and kill those innocent people. It's been said a number of times here: THAT IS NOT HONOURABLE. Those who did not lift a finger to aid that war effort and did not benefit voluntarily from it were ALWAYS more honourable than those who knowingly and voluntarily went, all other bloody things being bloody equal.

"Of course, no two people are exactly alike but behavior typically falls in clusters....."

Uh, yeah. Passive resisters of drafts typically shoplift and do all manner of other supposedly unpleasant stuff (you as pissed about rock and roll as you are about sex 'n drugs?). Nice "archetype".


I've gathered you weren't around at the time. You really oughta listen a bit more to people who were. I like #101. That guy -- who'd done the whole active-resistance thing -- didn't spend too much time worrying about how the people they advised on how to get the hell out were going to spend the next 5 years, and whether they were morally worthy of being saved from getting sent to Vietnam 'cause they really and truly objected to the aims of the war. He wasn't a self-righteous prig presuming to judge the people he helped (thereby also helping the people on the other side of the planet he wanted to help). He didn't stand in awe of people who had the courage of their contemptible convictions. He saw the two choices: go, don't go. He knew which one was right. That was what mattered.


You probably didn't pay sufficient attention to my own mention of having done something active myself, female and on the other side of the border though I was. I'm not going to say what it was. I've said that it could have had serious negative ramifications on my future, and I was pretty much just lucky that it didn't. I didn't go to jail -- and I would point out that what I did wasn't something showy and relatively safe and pointless like throwing pig's blood at the US embassy or some such. It was a serious and considered act, and it had direct benefit that was not for myself, at potential personal risk/expense in terms of my own life. It very definitely did not involve condemning someone who "served" out of lack of knowledge and understanding of their options or perceived powerlessness to resist.

So it seems that unlike you, I *do* know what my own response would be, what my choice would be from the options available to me -- and it was NOT mere passive resistance. And I think that this just puts me, like the author of post # 101, in a slightly better damned position than you to judge -- OR NOT -- what others did.

.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

114. You Seem To Know Alot About Me....

To be able to make all kinds of negative judgements about me ......

All by a couple of posts on the net....

And I thought intelligent people scoffed at the psychic network....

You don't want to let this go....

Fine...Game .... Set.... Match....

And for the record my thinking tends to the analog not binary......

I think Post 101 said my take was "balanced" but hey I don't come to here to get my ego stroked nor am I running for mayor of this board -:)

I was an alert kid in 68.... My mom was a Stevenson delegate in 56....Walked precincts for JFK in 60, took to me to the front of a rope line in 64 when I was six to shake Bobby Kennedy's hand when he was running for senator of New York... I have a letter from him in 68 before his death telling me "a well informed young citizenry was the nation's best hope for the future"...I was a Kennedy delegate myself in 80 but I digress....

As for the horrors of war I am all too familiar with them.... My dad served in the Good War ,WW2, ....Before he was drafted he was a star athelete , winning medals in swimming and baseball... He also was a Golden Gloves fighter.... Well WW2 ended all that.... Fighting in North Africa during WW2 he took shrapnel in his right eye and contacted malaria... Spent six months at Walter Reed... They saved his eye but couldn't save his sight.....

He went in an aspiring athelete and came out a shell... I will always believe that the war contributed to his death at the young age of 58 when I was only fourteen but I digress again... It sucked having a dad with one eye who couldn't do the things with his son that other dads did... I can still remember going with him as a kid to the V A clinic to get his free glasses... I can also remember him crying when the POWS came home after the Paris Peace Agreement...

I wish I had his "stuff"....

Oh, and your condescending attitude sucks....

I'll await your response but my hopes aren't high....

Respectfully,

Brian

[Tom Rinaldo]

44. Canada was looking good

I always very actively opposed the War and organized against it from late 1967 on. At first I had a student deferement, (I didn't go to school to avoid the draft however, I would have gone anyway). Then they did away with deferments and launched the lottery, and I got a high enough number that I knew they wouldn't take me. My plan was to go to Canada if they tried to draft me. I thought about going to jail or underground, but thought I could accomplish more for myself and the movement from Canada if it came to it. I personally could not have fought in that war, though I believed I could fight in a war that I thought was "just". I don't hold other's choices against them.

[joeybee12]

45. You forgot one option--getting out because you're gay

I was too young--approaching the draft age when Vietnam ended (so to speak). I knew at that age it was an unjust war, and I didn't want to serve. I also knew at that point I was gay, although I hadn't come out. I figured I would have to be honest when the time came.

[oasis]

46. Having only limited information available early on, many patriots served

for pure sense of duty to the America they loved. And rightly so.

[Johnyawl]

47. Enlisted in the USMC 1968

Did a tour in Vietnam 1969-70.

As a member of the working poor, college was not an option. I grew up knowing military service was something that I was going to do following High School. Remember there was a draft my entire life growing up. I watched, from about age 8 on, as my cousins went off to military service. Not serving was never considered. My grandfather, his brother, and his brother-in-law served in Europe during WWI. My Dad, three uncles, and numerous of my Dad's cousins saw action in WWII.(the family managed to miss Korea). I had two cousins serve in Vietnam before me, and one at the same time. (another Marine) Of course we all believed in what we were doing at the time.

It's very easy to have these conversations in retrospect. Try to remember that the majority opinion in this country supported the war until the seventies. In 1972 George McGovern ran as the peace candidate, and lost in a whopping landslide.

[liberalhistorian]

53. I think it's really hard to know what you'd

do in a situation unless you're in it. And I think it's really easy to look back in hindsight and say you'd have certainly done such and such, and so-and-so should have done such and such, but if you're not in that situation you have no right to say that.

I'm only 38, and female, so the Vietnam situation doesn't really apply to me, but I do know people who did all of the things mentioned. Some went, some fought it, and some got out of it through student deferments, pulling strings, or fake medical conditions (Rush LIEbaugh, anyone?) I'm sure those who were drafted would have loved to have had those "other priorities" that Darth Cheney claims kept him from serving, as would my uncle, who was a marine in the front lines of Vietnam in the late 60's.

Those who went often didn't have a choice, as they were drafted and weren't powerful enough or rich enough, or weren't the right race, to get out of it. Others went out of a sense of duty to their country, not realizing they were being fed a crock of shit by their leaders who didn't really give a damn about them except as fodder for their political games and power plays.

[IndianaGreen]

54. You forgot the Canadian option!

and the lucky ones that were able to get in safe stateside National Guard units, like Dan Quayle.

Hindsight is 20/20.

None of the choices were easy, except those that had the means to afford college.

[sventvkg]

55. at 19 and a clueless Gung ho that I was I would have enlisted

Just like I did....Now at 32 and much more in the know, I would be an ACTIVE resister...Would not fight for someones bullshit agenda...But at 19 they would have had me..coming from a long line of glorious veterans I was GUNG HO as you can get!!! Seen Born on the 4th of July? That could have been me and That's probably how i would have ended up....I mean I almost got killed in the Army traing for the 1st Gulf War and it put me out...Anyway, this is how they get so many piece of young cannon fodder...I can easily see how because they blatently would have had me....

[JI7]

56. Bill Clinton was NOT a passive resister

bill clinton was active in his opposition to the war. he attended protests. he struggled over the issue. far different from bush who people say cared nothing for the issue as long as he himself didn't have to go.

[AP]

76. According to The Hunting of the President, Clinton...

"exposed himself" to the draft after a friend of his from high school died.

I have no idea what that means. The book says that his number eventually did not come up.

Does anyone know anything about this? Does that mean he waived a deferment to which he was entitled?

[durutti]

118. Actually

There's some evidence that Clinton provided info on the anti-war movement to American intelligence.

[AP]

120. I just read that Hitchens clams this but his evidence is bizarre...

...he says that infomration only he knew was given to the CIA, and that he shared a girlfriend with Clinton (who later became a lesbian, so "one of us was doing the right thing, or the wrong thing") and Hitchens says it wasn't him who told the CIA, so it must have been Clinton.

This story has it all: sexual obsession with Clinton, self-agrandizement and delusions of gradeur ("only I knew" -- which is almost definitely not the case; is there any information the CIA cares about which ONLY Hitchens could know?), bad logic (couldn't the lesbian girlfriend also have been the source, or someone else?), the desire to feel relevanat to history, and the possibility that maybe Hitchens could have been informed the CIA if only he could remember through the drugs and alcohol what he did when he was young.

[zatoichi]

57. If I could go back...

Here's the deal. I went to Vietnam in 1965 for about six months. The escalation had not yet begun. I was pretty much into living for the moment and, while a pseudo-intellectual, I was not a terribly deep thinker. By the time the wave of protest had begun to surge, I was living in Berkeley. Of course I was now against the war -- I'd already done my time. NOW, however, I would definitely spit in the eye of the entire draft system and refuse to go! War is Fraud. Smedley Butler said that, and he was one of our own. We learned about him at Parris Island. I ain't marchin' anymore. And I am urging my 16-year-old son to seriously consider other options WHEN the draft is reinstated.

[leftofthedial]

63. I was eligible for the last two Viet Nam drafts

But drew a very high lottery number.

I also had a surviving son deferment.

I hated the war, but I probably would have served.

[Doc_Technical]

64. 1A, lottery number 68.

Joined the Air Force, served 3 years, 4 months.
Got out early because of a Reduction In Forces.
The military and I didn't get along too well.
I did consider Canada but I didn't have the guts.

[DrBB]

79. In my case, 1A, lottery number 360

And then the draft ended. I don't think I'd have lasted five minutes in the military, but who knows. I probably would have gone for the college deferment if I'd had a low number.

And always nice to see another Firesign-inspired moniker, assuming that's the Doc Technical you had in mind. "Never should have let him go out there on that asteroid..." ?

[fabius]

66. I was 14 in '68, 18 in '72.

I just missed it. I was actually signed up for the draft. In 1973 I was eligible.

Nixon canned it that same year.

I had no plan but to hope for a miracle. There were no more student deferments by '73, just the lottery. I wasn't politically well developed enough to really be a conscientious objector.

Two of my friends, a littel older, actually JOINED UP. One lucky guy went to Germany the other to NAM. He's got all his limbs intact but his head is somewhat screwed up.

God was I relieved when Nixon threw in the towel.

[jsw_81]

70. I would have gone to Canada

There's no way I would have allowed Johnson or Nixon to send me off to get blown into bits in some horrible Vietnam swamp.

[mmonk]

72. Actually, just after I registered

(six or seven months) and my number was one to be called (tumbling balls lottery as I remember), Nixon began the withdrawals and cancelled the draft. I was lucky, but I had many friends who were not.

[quaker bill]

75. Similarly

I signed up, my number was pulled (7). The draft was cancelled 3 weeks before my birthday. I was lucky enough not to have to decide. I am not sure how I would have decided, the war was extremely unpopular and an obvious failure by that time.

Some friends of mine went to Nam. Some went to Canada. Some did large quantities of drugs for weeks before their physical and got deferrments. Others resisted and went to jail.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

82. As you note, serving was honorable and something to be proud of.

Active resistance and protest was also honorable and something to be proud of.

Doing both was rare and inspiring.

Getting a medical or student deferment may not have been dishonorable but it certainly was nothing to be proud of.

What do we look for in a President? Someone who games the system, or someone who inspires us?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. Thank You For Reading My Post Carefully.....

That was my whole point....

I'm not saying folks who gamed the system by getting deferments or serving in the Guard were bad people but they lacked the "moral clarity"* that those who served or actively opposed the war did....

I get tired of saying this... I would have prolly tried to game the system too.... I would have tried to be as far away from the front lines as possible, the Guard, a mess hall in Fort Dix, college, etcetera but I don't think I'm presidential timber either....

I want my president to be braver, smarter, wiser, and more compassionate than me...

* I put "moral clarity" in quotation marks cuz I find it ironic that the right has glommed on to this word when so many of their cohorts lack it and demonstated their lack when they didn't fight in all the "noble causes" they puroport to revere....

If I hate anything it's duplicity and hypocrisy....

[JNelson6563]

83. I have a 12 year old son

if the war-mongering reich-wing stays in power and we achieve perpetual war you can damn well be sure we will be residing in Canada. My son will not fight for Halliburton or any other corporate master. I'd have done the same for him back in Viet Nam days too.

Iraqnam. It's all bad.

Julie

[welshTerrier2]

86. Neither honor nor bravery

IMHO, these were the two honorable choices a brave man who had physical as well as moral courage could have chosen....

I strongly disagree with this statement ...

When the evil empire declares war to serve their corporate greed, there is no honor to be gained by either supporting its efforts or allowing it to chew you up for resisting ... resisting the war by "suffering the consequences" was no more effective than resisting the war by going to Canada or finding a way to not serve.

Refusing to pick up your rifle and kill Vietnamese should not be measured in terms of honor and bravery. There is often a thin line between bravery and stupidity. Why allow the "power elite" to imprison you? It serves no purpose.

The only honor I could see during the Vietnam war was the honor of understanding the war was wrong and refusing to serve in it ... and my point here is not to dishonor those who truly believed they were doing the right thing by serving, but rather to suggest that their actions, not their intentions, were misguided. I would really be curious to know how many DU'ers who did serve in Vietnam still believe the U.S. war there was justified ...

The point you raised about the inability of poor white and black kids to "get out of serving" is a valid critique of the inequities our draft system ... and frankly most of our other systems as well ... but this problem is not resolved by imprisoning those who refused to serve ...

The highest honor, IMHO, is to refuse service when called to an unjust war ... i see neither honor nor bravery, just foolishness, for allowing the military-industrial complex to destroy you when you refuse to serve.

[RichardRay]

88. OK, some of you people are starting to piss me off....

During my military service from 1969 - 1973 I helped run a center that provided couseling service for active duty personnel and education around the political, economic and social issues we were all facing. It was not what my commanding officer had in mind and after a few years the military and I parted company on rather bad terms.

I can tell you based on three years of personal experience that all the moral oneupsmanship, class loyalty and hypothetical horse pucky some folks are tossing around here just didn't happen and couldn't have happened in the US of that time. It is only very slightly more likely it would happen today.

There were a few Quakers and Mennonites who honestly knew what a CO was, there were a few children of Old Left parents who honestly knew what the class issues were. There were a whole lot of folks from all walks of life, social strata and economic stature who knew they didn't want to get their asses blown off but had no analysis to back it up. If you could pull it off you found a way out and were thankful. Very few folks looked beyond that. Other folks had no idea they had options, were either drafted or signed up and off they went. Some got out with different ideas that those they went in wity, others didn't.

If you think any differently than I suspect you need to go spend your seven years doing something different that what you're doing now.

[brainshrub]

89. Having voted #3

I have to admit that hindsight is 20/20

[Donna Zen]

90. I voted for active resistance

iirc, Calif. had so many resistors, they had quietly stopped looking for them. While that could be urban legend, one could assume that the system has a "tipping point." Had all of the people who wanted to say "no" said "no" the jails couldn't have held them all. Stadiums_bring em on. It is when we fail to stand together that we get the boot in the groin.

As a female, I was left with hiding people, writing letters, and protesting. I assure you, that from 67 until the end of the draft, I was pissed that I had no draft card to burn. I felt it was discriminatory.

Canada was not an easy choice or an easy reality. I had friends that did that. As part of the endless war, they have already taken that option off the table for the next draft.

Going. Whatever my feelings about Vietnam and Iraq, I understand that in the real world, it is necessary to have a military. Sad_yes; true_yes. There are those among the anti-Vietnam, anti-Iraq crowd who would kick butt if this country were under attack or seriously threatened. Count me in.

For those who served, I say thank you. You made a choice based on your beliefs, and therefore put yourself in harms way rather than fill that spot with someone who did not share your belief. I do not know why Kerry enlisted. Clark best friend was killed shortly before he made his choice. Both Kerry and Clark share their honor with those who also put their lives on the line by leaving or going to jail. Clark does not believe in the draft, what is Kerry's position?

I remember well the scramble to get out the draft. My boyfriend who never went to church, and actually was never passive about anything, managed a "CO" because of his family's friends on the draftboard. By 68-69-70 many people were up for anything.

Look, this thread illustrates why the draft is daft. It doesn't work, it's never been administered fairly, its all about who you know and who you are. If they reinstitute the draft, in twenty years someone, somewhere, will be having this conversation again and again. There is no answer to the above question that fits every case.

[kentuck]

91. Drafted and served....

If I had known then what I know now, I would probably have fought the war in a different manner.

[MoAWO]

94. The War

The War is over. That is in the past. Can't change what happened so time better spent on future wars.

[NNN0LHI]

93. Thank you to all who served. Just happy you made it home

I do not know what I would have done. I have given it much thought since I turned 18 in 1973 and I still do not know what I would have done had I been called to serve.

Don

[iverglas]

95. maybe you know the answer to this one

What is it that you are thanking the people who "served" in Vietnam FOR?

And while we're at it: why haven't you thanked the people who resisted that fucking abomination of a war, at least as warmly as you've thanked those who "served" in it? I can at least imagine what you'd be wanting thank the second group for, and yet you haven't.

.

[NNN0LHI]

115. For their sacrifice

Doesn't make any difference whether the reasons for the war were sound or not. Those men and women still sacrificed.

I haven't thanked the ones who resisted that fucking abomination of a war because it didn't occur to me to thank myself as I was also resisting our military involvement in Vietnam and I was supporting the anti-war movement at the time. Partly for my own self preservation, as it was getting close to the time I would be called if the war did not end. But for those others doing the same as me, I do appreciate their resistance to the war which may have cost me my life had I been drafted.

Don

[SEAburb]

99. are you a pro-active or path of least resistance person?

The path of least resistance was to serve when drafted.

I had to face the choice in '72, when my draft number was 25. Luckily they didn't get to me before the draft ended. They only drafted a few hundred that year.

I did have to go in and take all those predraft tests and got classified. I knew I could be drafted anyday, so I was planning take the three yr enlistment option. I was just about to enlist when I talked to a friend, who had 21 for his draft # and he said I should hold off joining, because the draft could end soon. I took his advice and avoided serving.

[NNN0LHI]

116. I would say I am somewhere in the middle depending on the situation

Getting drafted was something I really did not enjoy even thinking about after watching Walter Cronkite reporting the daily body counts year after year on the evening news. I think I was doing my best to try and block it out of my mind.

Don

[booley]

97. Thats a tricky question

..becuase I am a pacifist now but i did serve in the military. In fact, it was being in the military that gave me a rather low opinion of the Miltary leaders.

So if I was still 20 and knieve, I would have served.

If I knew then what I know now, I would have activly resisted.

"There is no Beginning to the world. Becuase every day, every moment is an act of creation. Thus, we are beginning right now. "

Some Guy I heard once

[Capn Sunshine]

101. There is NO way to describe the tenor of the times to you

You can theorize and pontificate and speculate all you want about "honor" and country, but the ideological argument was that the honorable thing to do was to resist this illconcieved war for profit to hopefully restore the integrity of our country in the world scene.

I was # 11 in the lottery. I burned my draft card in front of the induction center on Wilshire Bl. where I was ordered to go. I returned my induction paperwork to the sender with "deceased" written on the envelope. This apparently confused them for several years.

Further, we determined in this day beorfe major computerization, that at one point in the induction process, they actually give your you entire military file and tell you to go downstairs to a holding area until the next transport came.

WE simply haunted the stairwells of the buildings and told as many as we could to leave and take the file with you. We cooked many a file on Zuma Beach in bonfires.

Ultimately, if you were even slightly informed you knew you were just fodder for the big war machine, and that any trumped up rationale for being there was just that.

I was ultimately aprehended for aiding and abetting plus evading the draft plus about 19 other Federal Charges.It was very surreal; about 10 black suited Feds came for me at my place of employment. All charges sealed or dropped in a plea bargain that found me serving my govt. in Central America in the direct successor to the Vietnam effort. Gotta keep those hot wars going, Dow , GE and General Dynamics need the money.

Oh, wait did I forget honor and country?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

102. I Think I Had A Good Grasp Of The Times...

I had a cousin who went to Nam....


Another cousin who went to the Guard.


And another cousin who went to college....


In the original post I unequivocally stated that those who actively opposed the draft were heroes and acted honorably.....


I wasn't conflating honor with patriotism because the two can converge as well as diverge....

[Capn Sunshine]

104. I wasnt referring to you directly

I thought your post was very balanced. I think a lot of younger people are confused about it due to media laziness and our own need to shut that debate up and keep it locked down; for years it was this way.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

105. Thank You....

NT

[Zorra]

103. So, what was 'Nam about again?

No one ever really explained it well; I alwys just kind of figured it was about economics and war profiteering. I seem to remember some story about the Gulf of Tonkin and a ship getting attacked that didn't really get attacked. It was just a lie to escalate the war? Well, what kind of crazy people do things like that?

[RichardRay]

111. It was about...

confusion, fear, patriotism, jingoism, grandiosty, ignorance, greed, pomposity, honor, duty, grief, rage, bewilderment, powerlessness, courage, blindness and trying to survive, no matter who you were.

[Zorra]

119. Great answer.

Thanks.

[jpgray]

107. Served--who else would go in my place, and what right do I have to run?

If some poor kid who doesn't have the means to avoid the war has to go in my place, I couldn't in good conscience refuse to go. Even though the war was NOT admirable in any way or fashion.

[Deja Q]

110. Not qualify

Due to health conditions, I can't qualify.

Besides, I would have used the 'gay card'. They don't like gay people, you see... And using it is quite fitting since, being gay myself, I will not serve in a military in a country that treats me as second class or worse. Paying taxes is more than enough as it is and I'd be hazed and hurt by fellow soldiers anyway. F that S.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

112. As For The Gay Card....

I don't care who a person wants to sleep with if they want to serve in the military they should be allowed...

I believe we are the only industrialed democracy with a policy that discrimnates against gays....

It's an abomination....