I wish someone would ask McCain how HE would have handled Vietnam

[chknltl]

A great deal could be learned about how a McCain Presidency will handle Iraq and any future military actions, if that question were to be asked. My sense is that McCain is one of those few veterans who feel that the Vietnam fiasco was a winnable war! History proved us 'doves'-(as we anti-war types were called back in the '60s and '70s)-right, that we needed to not be over in Vietnam. Vietnam was a dark period in America's history, NOT because we 'lost' that war but because we had NO business being in Vietnam militarily to begin with!

No, we never LOST in Vietnam, our government finally buckled to the will of We The People and brought our lads and lasses home. What occurred after we came home, (and while we were leaving) was a direct result of the will of the peoples of Vietnam. It was THEIR country all along! It was never our country, it was never up to us to tell the citizens of that nation how to govern their own affairs! All those lives maimed and lost, utterly senseless. The citizens of Vietnam have somehow found it in their hearts to forgive us.

I'm of the opinion that John McCain, a man who feels that we were 'beaten' in Vietnam, would handle military actions as simple win or lose propositions. Imagine where THAT kind of thinking would have taken us had John McCain been President instead of President Johnson. Imagine that kind of thinking applied right now with: Iraq or Afghanistan, Pakistan or even North Korea1 Yeah pretty grim to think about isn't it?

Most Americans now understand to some degree that we never should have gone over to Vietnam to begin with. I challenge anyone here to find even ten of our fellow Americans outside of the CEOs within the military industrial complex, who feel we should return to Vietnam with our military in order to bring those folks democracy. Yeah see how utterly stupid that sounds all things considered?

Should we somehow get through all of the turmoil, future Americans will be saying exactly what I am saying here but they will be saying it about Iraq. I hope the citizens of the Middle East will find it in their hearts to forgive us like the citizens of Vietnam have... I can think of ONLY ONE real reason for them to do so: We humans are far better this, given the chance we as a race CAN make the right choice, blind hate or revenge is never the right answer.

To all those readers who feel that we need to 'fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here': do you see many Vietnamese attacking us ANYWHERE? The Vietnamese people, if anybody, actually have a damned good reason to be angry at us! If your response is BUT they did not hit us on 9-11, I would remind you that Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan did not hit us on 9-11 either! Like the citizens of Vietnam we sure are giving the citizens of those three countries a damned good reason to be angry at us too! Those three countries belong to their citizens NOT TO US. If you STILL can not get this point, tell me, how would YOU have handled Vietnam? Should we go back and fix our 'mistake'? Someone needs to ask McCain how he would have handled Vietnam.

[Lucky 13]

1. Ha. We'd still be there.

NEVER SURRENDER!!!

:eyes:

[chknltl]

3. I think you are right. We the People's response to McCain:

WRONG ANSWER!

[Lucky 13]

4. That picture gets me everytime.

I imagine if I had the chance to give Barack a hug, I'd have the exact same expression on my face!

[chknltl]

10. Credit where credit is due:

Normally I enjoy chatting about this photo, I always respond to all compliments regarding it because I dearly love this photo too! But in this case I am in a rush to take off, so, Credit where Credit is DUE: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=7134261

[endarkenment]

2. He susbscribes to the stabbed in the back theory

The dirty libruls (such as Nixon and Kissinger it seems) kept the military from winning the war. There is an excellent theory that McCrazyOldMan views Iraq as redemption: they can win in Iraq and by doing so 'prove' that they could have won in Vietnam. Of course they can't actually win in Iraq, anymore than they could have won in Vietnam, but that reality has not been an issue for them, they make their own.

[chknltl]

7. I am under the impression that that theory has been rebuffed.

I do so in my own mind but I thought that even military theorists had long ago rebuffed all military solutions to Vietnam. I had not heard that mCcain thinks to vindicate the notion of winning Vietnam by winning in Iraq-makes sense though when put that way. These are the thoughts of IDIOTS and I have never thought of Mccain as anything better than an idiot.

IMO:
When one looks at how Vietnam is today, one sees the stupidity of why we went there to begin with and the stupidity of why we stayed for as long as we did! Most Americans at the time believed it was to prevent Vietnam from falling to communists who, if left unchecked, would have spread throughout Southeast Asia and then perhaps the middle east and yes many many Americans even believed that communism would then spread here! I remember arguments exactly like that out of the 'Hawks', (patriotic Americans who felt in their hearts that we needed to be in Vietnam defending America from Communism!!!)

Looking at the way things turned out and comparing this history to the citizens thinkings of why we needed to be there back then-THAT is IMO the very rebuff which disproves that war! The very notion of 'winning' or 'losing' is placing the discussion in the hands of IDIOTS imo! There was NOTHING for us to 'WIN OR LOSE'! Do folks like McCain think we needed to be in Vietnam to stop the spread of Communism or does he NOW believe that we needed to be there to-SPREAD DEMOCRACY? Wait a minute-IF spreading Communism militarily is WRONG then why isn't spreading Democracy militarily equally wrong? Do you see why I consider the notion of winning or losing in these cases utter nonsense? Isn't democracy THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE? Aren't we hypocrites for not 'allowing' the will of the people in other nation's to play out as it may???

Nazism needed stopping because it WAS spreading, Japan needed stopped because they too were spreading AND they hit us hard first! Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan deserved to be left alone from the start. There was nothing to 'win' to begin with in these nations.

[endarkenment]

14. There was a IVAW protestor at the RNC

holding a sign that read "You Cannot Win An Occupation". That sums up the surreal idiocy, the complete depravity of the argument that McMoron and the neocon gangsters are attempting to use at this point. There is no victory. Whatever military victory was possible was achieved two weeks into the war with the collapse of the Iraqi Army. Since that time the only unresolved issue was how we get our troops out of an occupation.

[Zenmaster]

5. It would be a bad idea to ask McCain about Vietnam

His response would just be something along the lines of. "I would have liked to have been able to make decisions in Vietnam, but instead I was in a box for 5 years getting tortured for my country."

While I understand what you are saying, there are no points to be gained by asking McCain anything about Vietnam.

[chknltl]

8. hmmm. I had not considered that.

If he did turn things around to his being a POW, (history shows us he needs little prompting to do JUST THAT), the responses I seek would not be forthcoming. I suppose in that case I would have to ask the follow-up: "Sir, you say you would have liked to have been able to have made those decisions, so what would those decisions have been?"

Another-words, I agree with you, he would likely try to wiggle out and he would get to throw in this fave 'I was a POW' thing for free, but I would not give up. I would genuinely like to know what he would have done differently to have prevented 'our loss' (HIS WORDS BTW), in Vietnam.

[Zenmaster]

11. You'd just never get him to answer. He's got too much of an easy out on Vietnam

Its not worth it to ask him. He's got a permanent pass on any Vietnam question.

He could just take it further and say something like, "I'm not going to play any hypothetical games about the lives of so many brave Americans that I fought along side of, and shared cells with during my time as a POW. I was not in position to make any decisions, other than the decision to remain captive, after I was offerred my freedom, and I won't tarnish their names by playing 'what if' 30 years later."

As I said...you just aren't going to "get" McCain, with any Vietnam question. Its just not going to happen. There's no reason to try to go after him on the one thing that he really is untouchable (in the public's eyes) about. We don't want Vietnam brought up against him...just don't go there.

[chknltl]

13. If he wouldn't go there I'd use his own words to take us there.

He HAS said that we lost in Vietnam, he HAS said that he won't let us lose in Iraq. If he wants to say that an additional 54,000 Americans dying in Iraq just to get us up to speed with a war that we could not win is acceptable, well that is what he is willing to give us-if he wants to explain how he would have handled things differently in Vietnam AND how he would handle things differently in Iraq then by all means he is welcome to do so. Until he wants to explain how he would have handled things differently in Vietnam then I am left to presume that all he has is the failed policies that did not work back then, the very policies, that he claims caused us to lose.

If does want to explain how his policy in Iraq are somehow different than President bush's policies then by all means go right ahead and tell us how he would handle things differently. This is all about his plans so let's hear them, we have the right to hear them otherwise it is apparant that he has NOTHING. If we 'lost' in Vietnam then he can damn well tell us how and why. If he is going to prevent a loss in Iraq he can damn well tell us how and why. If he has a better plan We The People deserve to hear it. McCain can put up or shut up!

We can vote for change. McCain is status-quo not change. If Mccain has plans that work better than the status-quo, if he can prove he had a better plan for the status-quo back in the 60s and 70s then he can damn well prove it. If he wants to dodge the question and talk about being a POW or even Moose hunting, well we will know that he is just a windbag. Personally when it comes to his military plans, past, present or future I am all ears

[palintology]

6. Fore sure ... he would have left the POWs behind.

Just to cover his own ass.

[FrenchieCat]

9. He would have won it. That's what he says about war; he knows how to win them....

I don't think he goes into how. That might be a more difficult answer for him....since he most likely has not even one clue.

[chknltl]

12. Well if he is so goood at waging war...why doesn't he help bush???

Is he keeping this uber-war-knowledge secret from those waging war right now???? EXACTLY what does he have that is different from bush's plan anyway???? Why hasn't bush accepted this new strategy if it so different and so good? If he loses to Obama is he planning on taking his toys and heading home???? Sure seems to me that his 'vast' abilities are sorely needed right now, afterall we are spending brazillians each month when that money is needed at home!

I'm gonna take a guess here but I think McCain's got NOTHIN!!!!!! All he has is bush's failures PERIOD!!!!! If he truly had anything he would have used it lomg ago to make is lame ass look good. Obama has a plan-he has laid it out to the American people! Obama's plan is different than bush's plan. bush has ignored Obama's plan, which is why Obama's plan is not in action. The bottom line is McCain has bush's lunacy for a plan and Obama has something different. Insanity is continuing to do the same things and expecting something different. McCain can't even promise us something different while good bad or ugly Obama can promise us something different.