Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Charlatan
I don't see how you can say that Ustwo's post doesn't stand up to scrutiny? What support should an opinion require?
Roaeanne was the most watched woman in TV at one time.
Cronkite was at his peak in a radically different time. He was on the air when there were really only three souces of television newsmedia and audiences were in the tens of millions. In today's mediascape he would be just another voice among many and he would be under a lot more scrutiny as these many voices have given us more and varied points of view.
As for Vietnam. I think it's a very safe thing to say that America left Vietnam to totalitarian rule whether or not more or less lives were saved by the US leaving when they did is open for debate. I don't think it's all that cut and dry.
The real question on Vietnam (and Iraq) has to do with why war was needed in the first place and again, this is still a matter of opinion and hindsight. Make no mistake, lessons were learned from Vietnam, they just might not be the lesson you think.
Can you suggest what support Ustwo should supply to support his opinions?
|
C'mon Charlatan, it's obvious that Elphaba was reacting to this:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
....Congratulations, to him for helping fuel a retreat....
|
14 months ago, I presented my usual...a thoroughly supported argument that made the case that it was not "liberals" who were responsible for the decision to withdraw the US military from Vietnam, or for the effectiveness of it's strategy:
<a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=108864">Vietnam:Reagan's "Noble War", The Left forced the US to fight with one hand tied,Or? </a>
Here is Ustwo's entire response to my argument and it's supporting articles/opinions, in that thread:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
The nobel goal in Vietnam was to save people from the 'joy' of communism.
It failed with tragic results after the US pull out.
Quote:
|
Reagan made a speech to the American Legion convention, pandering for the military vote.
|
A poll conducted late last year by the Military Times found that 57 percent of those surveyed consider themselves Republican, while 13 percent identified with the Democrats. Among the officer corps the numbers were different. Nearly 66 percent of officers considered themselves Republican compared with 9 percent Democratic. Nearly 30 percent of those surveyed by the Military Times declined to answer the questions or said they were independent.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5964655/
Republicans don't need to pander to get the military vote, this isn't a draft army, these are volunteers, you won't find many Democrats. Its even worse for the democrats if you look at the national guard and the reserves.
Don't forget it was the Democrats who did their best to get military votes thrown out in 2000, they didn't do that because the military votes Democrat. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
host if there were not odd rules of conduct.....why did we not invade North Vietnam in the first place? The answer is obvious, but shows a difference between Iraq and Vietnam right there.
|
....and now, he comes back with the same ole shit. It's wearing, boring, propagandist, and Elphaba called him on it. Cronkite was a journalist, not an anti war movement leader. President Johnson knew that. Cronkite played no part in any US "retreat". It wasz five full years after Cronkite's Feb. 27, 1968 telecast, that the US graound forces ceased an active "on the ground" role in Vietnam, in Jan. 1973. US combat air support continued even after that.
WWII was fought and wrapped up in 45 months...Dec., 1941, to Aug., 1945
Ustwo refuses to accept that the US government lied to the American people about it's own conclusion of prospects for a military solution in Vietnam, and he refuses to debate it, but he keeps coming back, posting shit like this, all the same.