OT Grandmas -Gotta Love 'Em!!!

=====

War protesters love America, and America's children. That's why the war protesters in the Sixties tried to bring the Vietnam War to an end--a war that kill 60 thousand of America's children...for nothing.

We're just glad you're OK.

=====

Although I was hard on soldiers in my previous posts, I have a lot of respect for Scott and his fellow slaves. I just don't approve of what they're doing.

However, God protect all American slaves fighting right now for their master Queen Bush.

For nothing?

How about an end to the Cold War? How about all of the people in Thailand, Laos, and Burma who managed to avoid living under an oppressive regime thanks to our efforts? How about all of the Vietnamese immigrants whose kids can grow up to be doctors and engineers instead of rotting in some re-education camp somewhere?

I assure you that had we not prosecuted the Viet Nam war as we had, the world would be a very different place today, and not in a good way. If you're protesting the current war I'd suggest you familiarize yourself with the region and start thinking about the consequenses of *not* prosecuting it, before you become so incensed about what's happening there or the actions of our current administration.

-- Mike Harris Austin TX

Are you one of the protestors that spit on our service men?

I invite you to come down to Florida and march with me tomorrow in our local Veterans day parade.

I also invite you to make your comments to the heroes that will be assembled....

You appear to need to talk to some real vets....

=====

No, I don't spit on anyone. I don't shoot at anyone either, like soldiers do on both sides of a war.

And that story about war protesters spitting on service men is apocryphal. Boston University professor Howard Zinn (author of "A People's History of the United States") checked into that so-called "spitting story," and could not find it reported in any newspaper of the day. It never happened. It doesn't exist anywhere on the public record.

But the far right always prances out that story like it's some kind of Clydesdale.

Umm, I think it was BU professor Zinn that did the recent research--coulda been somebody else.

Anyway, as I said before, military service is slavery. What are those men doing fighting each other anyway? Lovable Dum-dums

Scott, I don't mean to be stepping on your toes. However, in all truthfulness, to me soldiers seem to be just like ants...little army ants.

You ought to read Harvard professor E. O. Wilson's books; he'll teach you all about ant societies and their amazing parallels to human societies. Both animals are quite organized.

You poor misguided little army ant--God bless you and all little army ants around the world [chuckle].

=====

Well, the Domino Theory was proven to be incorrect. We lost the Vietnam war, but no other dominoes fell. Thailand, for example, never went "red" like Johnson was claiming if we lost in Vietnam.

The Democrats did not take over anything, they were elected by a majority of voters who finally saw through the Bushit.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Aw Truckdude, you shouldn't have told him that. He thinks the dems had a coup d'etat and took over Washington with Bradley tanks and flash-bang grenades. he imagined long lines of loyal Republicants being paraded down the streets, a la the Bataan march. Speaking of which, I wonder what GWB said to whoever told him about the two houses of Congress being in Dem hands....."I'll pray on it...?"

I wonder what he said to the now useless Rove.

Nah....look at the Dims that were elected....they were ...for the most part... conservative.

The Republicans caught the Dim 'spend' fever and the voters spanked them.

The Dims will show their true colors with extreme left leadership and the voters will slap them down again.

Historically the party in power loses about the same exact number during the off year election of a two term president. The vote difference was very small and some of the democrats that won, won without a majority. We're not whinning though, we just want you all that voted for the dimmies to get a memory refresh.

Are we talking about Bradley armoured fighting vehicles? Wow, do people still still those? (For a good cringe, watch the humorous but painful "Pentagon Wars", which follows the chaotic process of its "development" and the small mountains of money wasted on it.)

Should have read:

Are we talking about Bradley armoured fighting vehicles? Wow, do people still _use_ those? (For a good cringe, watch the humorous but painful "Pentagon Wars", which follows the chaotic process of its "development" and the small mountains of money wasted on it.)

Builtwell,

It's not that simple, of course.

Firstly, Eisenhower not Johnson was the first president to introduce the "Domino Theory" to the American public. As a student of history you are of course well aware of this; perhaps it simply slipped your mind.

You also of course know that Cambodia did in fact go "red" in 1975 - and that the Khmer Rouge regime was the bloodiest in history as measured by percentage of populace killed. At least 20% and possibly as much as 40% died (1.5 to 3 million dead of 7 million people). As an aside, you are also aware that the top seed for deaths overall would have to be Mao's China; the government-caused famine (1959 - 1961) killed conservatively 30 million souls, and possibly as many as 60 million by some estimates.

To be more correct, you should have written that among the experts the concern was that Thailand might go "red" if we failed to prosecute the Viet Nam war - not if we lost it. This is a subtle yet important distinction. In Thailand we had the support of the government and the "hearts and minds" of the Thai people and presumably would have met with more success fighting a Communist insurgence there. Had we failed to pick up the check for the mess the French left after Dien Bien Phu in 1954 the situation in Thailand in the 1960s might have been different and the Royal Thai government might not have been as stable during the anti-monarchy sentiments popular at the time.

Of course, had Truman recognized Ho Chi Minh's government - as Ho had requested after we'd supported them in WWII against the Japanese, we might have had a unified Viet Nam with no worse than a daffy Socialist government along the lines of what the UK had in the post WWII years, and the Viet Nam war would never have happened.

Mike Harris wrote: >

Thanks for that interesting analysis of events, Mike.

But, as I've said before, ants behave viciously no matter what ant hill--uh, country--they fight for. Especially, the male ants :-)

No they don't. They are manipulated by the Communists to weaken America's war effort. They did it in WW2 (That tratior Petrillo they named the band shell after in Chicago comes to mind) and they did it during the Cold War (See Julius and Ethel Rosenberg) and they were behind the anti-war protests in Vietnam and Iraq. So go hang your hammer and sickle flag and show us who you really are. And you're going on my blocked list.

Charles of Schaumburg.