News Justice for Victims of Agent Orange

[JohnDubYa]

You still haven't told us your opinion of John F. Kennedy, who ordered the "chemical warfare" on the Vietnamese people. Why can't you answer the question?

 

[Prometheus]

You still haven't told us your opinion of John F. Kennedy, who ordered the "chemical warfare" on the Vietnamese people. Why can't you answer the question?

I am not sure why you brought up this topic originally, and why you are asking me.

Do you expect me to make a simple answer and the question is over with, or are you hopeing to start up a major side topic?

I will say that I think that it was a major mistake to drop large amounts of agent orange on Vietnam, and I think extremely poorly of the decision to do so. Does this satisfy your question? I can't imagine that you would think that I could have any other opinion on the decision to drop agent orange, based on the comments that I have made so far.

Can you take a stab at my last question now?

 

[JohnDubYa]

I am not sure why you brought up this topic originally, and why you are asking me.

Do you expect me to make a simple answer and the question is over with, or are you hopeing to start up a major side topic?

I will say that I think that it was a major mistake to drop large amounts of agent orange on Vietnam, and I think extremely poorly of the decision to do so. Does this satisfy your question? I can't imagine that you would think that I could have any other opinion on the decision to drop agent orange, based on the comments that I have made so far.

C'mon Prometheus, answer the question! You must have an opinion on JFK. He's the one that ordered Agent Orange used on the Vietnamese population. WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF JFK?

I have another question: Should JFK be considered a war criminal?

(And quit using the passive "... of the decision to do so.")

 

[Prometheus]

C'mon Prometheus, answer the question! You must have an opinion on JFK.

I do have an opinion on JFK. However, your question is hightly loaded, and comes with no context. As well, you have asked it more than a dozen times, even after I provided a response. I have no idea why you are asking this question, and to provide a simplistic answer would only beg more questions.

What is your purpose? Do you even have one, other than to harp?

He's the one that ordered Agent Orange used on the Vietnamese population.

I am against all of his actions that promoted action in Vietnam.

I have another question: Should JFK be considered a war criminal?

Where did this question come from? You are the one who makes such great stretches of the imagination. Are you trying to call Bush a war criminal? Is that our purpose? Is so, just say so.

(And quit using the passive "... of the decision to do so.")

Aren't you the joker. I tell you to quit asking idiotic questions, even once they have been asnwered. You ignore me, yet I should listen to your pathetic admonition on my use of grammar. Right. Just trust you, right?

 

[kat]

Had to check the thread title to see if this was still the thread about "Justice for Victims of Agent Orange" Justice for victims has nothing to do with POW's and War crimes. Monsato, DOW and co. are all global companies that knew what their products were capable of doing. Our law provides for victims to sue for compensation. Agent Orange was not just spread in Vietnam, it was spread in the United States as well as other areas. Victims in the U.S. also have a right to sue for compensation and many have in class action suites.
I don't know why you need to convolute the issue.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I do have an opinion on JFK. However, your question is hightly loaded, and comes with no context. As well, you have asked it more than a dozen times, even after I provided a response. I have no idea why you are asking this question, and to provide a simplistic answer would only beg more questions.

First of all, my question is not loaded. If I had asked "What is your opinion on JFK's criminal behavior, then it would have been loaded.

Oh, provide as sophisticated answer as you want. The question is completely open-ended.

So once again, what is your opinion on JFK?

What is your purpose? Do you even have one, other than to harp?

I want to expose possibly hypocrisy in blasting the US for what it did in Vietnam and yet refusing to condemn those that ordered the killing in the first place. We hear all the time about how Nixon did this, and Reagan did that. But what about JFK? Why does the Left continually protect his image? Maybe you can answer that question?

I am against all of his actions that promoted action in Vietnam.

Oh, you are against his ACTIONS. So you just merely "disagree" with him? So are you against HIM? What are your personal opinions of HIM as a PERSON?

Where did this question come from?

It came from me. I recently asked it. You should have little trouble answering it. After all, Bush supporters like myself are continually asked our opinions of him. (Unless the poster is Adam, we usually give such questions a serious response.)

If you asked me if Bush was a war criminal, I would answer it in a heartbeat. I would say "Hell no!" and I would support my argument by, for example, noting the defeat of Saddam Hussein. But you seem unwilling. Why is that?

Aren't you the joker. I tell you to quit asking idiotic questions, even once they have been asnwered. You ignore me, yet I should listen to your pathetic admonition on my use of grammar. Right. Just trust you, right?

It isn't just the grammar. Such phrases as "... the decision to do so" buries the subject, a way of weaseling out of having to admonish. When people say "mistakes were made," they are usually too embarassed to answer the question "by whom"?

 

[Prometheus]

So once again, what is your opinion on JFK?

Aren't you the silly one.

I want to expose possibly hypocrisy in blasting the US for what it did in Vietnam and yet refusing to condemn those that ordered the killing in the first place.

So, I was correct. You are a simplistic thinker, and you suspect that others are as simplistic as yourself. You question is as dumb as you are trying to be.

We hear all the time about how Nixon did this, and Reagan did that.

From you, perhaps. Never from me on this forum.

But what about JFK? Why does the Left continually protect his image? Maybe you can answer that question?

Maybe you can answer that question. Why do you think in such simplistic terms as left and right?

Oh, you are against his ACTIONS. So you just merely "disagree" with him? So are you against HIM? What are your personal opinions of HIM as a PERSON?

Go ahead and cry about it all you want. You are attempting to expose possible hyprocrisy, because you think that I am as simplistic a thinker as you are showing yourself to be.

After all, Bush supporters like myself are continually asked our opinions of him. (Unless the poster is Adam, we usually give such questions a serious response.)

Or unless it is you. Nice try.

If you asked me if Bush was a war criminal, I would answer it in a heartbeat. I would say "Hell no!" and I would support my argument by, for example, noting the defeat of Saddam Hussein.

You think that one proves the other, do you? How quaint of you. Quite the deep thinker.

It isn't just the grammar. Such phrases as "... the decision to do so" buries the subject, a way of weaseling out of having to admonish. When people say "mistakes were made," they are usually too embarassed to answer the question "by whom"?

Yes, that is your problem. You make generalizations such as this, based on your simplistic thought processes.

I see that you feel that your ability to harp on an irrelevant point, attempting to explore possible hypocracies that your simplistic thinking creates in your simplistic mind. This allows you to justifiy not answering a single question that I have asked you over the past few posts. How intelligent of you. You have found a way to feel superior while avoiding saying anything but asking people to show you quotes as though we could reach out and help you open your eyes.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Aren't you the silly one.

Just answer the question: What is your opinion of JFK?

 

[russ_watters]

I don't know why you need to convolute the issue.

The issue gets convoluted by the facts that Vietnam isn't the US and the US was at war with Vietnam.

 

[kat]

The issue gets convoluted by the facts that Vietnam isn't the US and the US was at war with Vietnam.

The large chemical companies being sued aren't the U.S. either...

 

[hiphys]

if you really think freedom is not necessarily a good thing, say so. That is what you are suggesting.

Let ‘s see what US government did to bring freedom to Vietnam .

They created and supported a brutal puppet government in Vietnam. And this government broke the Geneve Accords by refusing a democratic election to reuninfy country. Ngo Dinh Diem was assigned to be the president of the South Vietnam by the US government. So, the Vietnamese even didn’t have the right to vote.

Is it the freedom that the US government wanted to bring to Vietnam ?

During the war , the Diem ‘s government transported the guillotine to all the provinces in South Vietnam to decapitate the suspected VCs. They developed a “strategic hamlet” program to remove peasants from their traditional villages, often at gunpoint, and resettled them in new hamlets fortified .The villagers were forbidden to leave the hamlets.

Is it the freedom that the US government wanted to bring to Vietnam ?

Johnson ordered ships to the North Vietnam’s territorial boundaries , and on August 4 both the Maddox and the USS Turner Joy reported that North Vietnamese patrol boats had fired on them. Johnson then ordered the first air strikes against North Vietnamese territory and went on television to seek approval from the U.S. public. (Subsequent congressional investigations would conclude that the August 4 attack almost certainly had never occurred.) The U.S. Congress overwhelmingly passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which effectively handed over war-making powers to Johnson until such time as "peace and security" had returned to Vietnam.

Is it the way that US government wanted to bring peace to Vietnam ?

“We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum.
We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals.”
Kerry, John F.

Is it the freedom that the US government wanted to bring to Vietnam ?

In November 1969 reports began to be published that soldiers under the command of Lieutenant William Calley had rounded up hundreds of Vietnamese civilians in the hamlet of My Lai and then raped, tortured, and murdered them.

? ? !

“We got more trouble for killing a water-buffalo than we did for killing people. That was something I could never adjust to.”
Lee Childers ,U.S. soldier.

“The American war in Vietnam destroyed three ancient civilizations. They had survived through millennia everything history can do, which is always plenty, but they could not survive us, who understood nothing about them, nor valued them, and do not grieve for them.”

Martha Gellhorn (1908 - 1998) , U.S. journalist and author.

Please don’t use the word “freedom” in this case !

 

[hiphys]

John McCain won't ever have normal use of his arms due to the number of times they were torn out of their sockets when he was a POW.

This Vietnamese POW won't ever have normal use of his arms ,too.He even couldn't stand up !
Ya, CON DAO is not a prison, but the hell.
This picture was shown in Vietnam war museum.
Most of the pictures here were taken by US and international photographers.

See the attachment below.

 

[hiphys]

Admiral James Stockdale.

"Stockdale wound up in Hoa Lo Prison - the infamous "Hanoi Hilton" -- where he spent the next seven years under unimaginably brutal conditions. He was physically tortured no fewer than 15 times. Techniques included beatings, whippings, and near-asphyxiation with ropes. Mental torture was incessant. He was kept in solitary confinement, in total darkness, for 4 years, chained in heavy, abrasive leg irons for 2 years, malnourished due to starvation diet and denied medical care, and deprived of letters from home in violation of the Geneva Convention."

Ya, it seems that the US soldiers did it more influently !
See the picture below.

 

[hiphys]

American soldiers tied up persons to their tank and dragged them on roads to death.
See the picture below.

 

[hiphys]

American soldiers cut Vietnamese soldiers ' head.
I think that these US men wouldn't be devil if they had refused to fight this nonsense war.
see the picture below.

 

[hiphys]

Now, I decide to stop posting these shocking pics althought I have much.
We talk about the past but we should look forward the future.

It's easy to find reasons for a war. The US government gave many reasons to avocade their nonsense war but we now know that many of them are liars.
Please think much before supporting the war.

In World War II. Vietnam stood by America to fight against Japanese.Viet Minh helped many OSS agents and American pilots.

In 1945, when Vietnam declared independence to the world, President Ho Chi Minh sent letter to make ralationship with USA. We wanted to make friend with your country.Althought all OSS agents in Vietnam persuaded their President to make relationship with VN, but US president refused. Instead of making friends, he chose war.We missed too many chances to be friends.

Here some pics that we should see.
President HO Chi Minh, General Vo Nguyen Giap with OSS agents.
Posters appealed Vietnamese to help American Pilot.
Young boy Viet Duc is playing football with his "three" legs.
Present and future is in our hand.
Peace in our hand.

 

[JohnDubYa]

It's easy to find reasons for a war.

North Vietnam certainly found its reasons.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Your pics show the brutalities of war (well, the one that shows up clearly), which the Geneva Convention is supposed to outlaw. Now who stated from the outset that they would not abide by the Geneva Convention?

If you are going to insinuate that the Viet Cong were peaceful people who never committed barbarity, feel free. I am not going to believe you.

 

[russ_watters]

It's easy to find reasons for a war. The US government gave many reasons to avocade their nonsense war but we now know that many of them are liars.

By the same token, much of what your government has told you about the war is (apparently) lies. Your country remains a dictatorship because of the US's failure to prevent it. I won't concede to the validity of the captions to any of those pictures without some real context.

Looking around for info on Con Dao, I don't see anyone saying it was an American prison - it was originally a French prison that was administered by South Vietnam during the war.

 

[Prometheus]

North Vietnam certainly found its reasons.

According to this logic, the north had no right to go to war with the south in the American Civil War.

Your pics show the brutalities of war (well, the one that shows up clearly), which the Geneva Convention is supposed to outlaw. Now who stated from the outset that they would not abide by the Geneva Convention?

Everybody knows this one. The United States expressly did not sign the 4th Geneva Convention in order to be able to act as it wanted in Vietnam. Surely you knew this.

If you are going to insinuate that the Viet Cong were peaceful people who never committed barbarity, feel free. I am not going to believe you.

The United States went half way around the world to bully a tiny country that did not want to be a colony of the French. When the Vietnamese dared resist the great United States, the U.S. dropped more tonnage of bombs on Vietnam than were dropped during WWII, and attempted to destroy their environment for a generation using such as Agent Orange.

You, however, claim that you are not going to believe that the Viet Cong were peaceful, since after all they put up such resistance to the United States. Do you think that the Viet Cong were more barbaric than the United States? If so, why?

 

[Prometheus]

By the same token, much of what your government has told you about the war is (apparently) lies. Your country remains a dictatorship because of the US's failure to prevent it.

You go there! Tell him!

Your country remains a dictatorship because of the US's failure to make you a French colony. French colonialism is the greatest form of liberty that you deserve.

Don't forget to tell him that the United States loved the Vietnamese people, and only had their best interests in mind.

 

[JohnDubYa]

According to this logic, the north had no right to go to war with the south in the American Civil War.

Huh? hiphysi lamented that there are always reasons to go to war. I said that North Vietnam certainly found its reasons. Are you suggesting that it didn't?

The United States expressly did not sign the 4th Geneva Convention in order to be able to act as it wanted in Vietnam. Surely you knew this.

Are you talking about the 4th Geneva Convention, or the 1977 protocols? (Or are you talking about the Geneva Accord?)

* Convention I: for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field.
* Convention II: for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea.
* Convention III: relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.
* Convention IV: relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.

These four Conventions have been signed by 190 states. The Additional Protocols of 1977 (AP I and II) have been signed by a majority of states, but by substantially fewer than the 1949 Conventions (161 and 156 states respectively of 191 UN member countries).However, they are still considered to have customary, if not moral, authority by many. The purpose of the two Additional Protocols was to clarify and strengthen the protection afforded to individuals, POWs and civilians in armed conflict.

Both the United States and Iraq are parties to the Geneva Conventions. The United States ratified the Conventions on 2 August 1955 and Iraq ascended on 14 February 1956. However, both countries are not signatories to the Additional Protocols of 1977."

http://www.ciss.ca/Comment_GulfWarPOWs.htm

...and attempted to destroy their environment for a generation using such as Agent Orange.

And who ordered the dumping of such horrific chemicals on such peace loving people. Surely he must be a monster, don't you agree? Who was that man, Prometheus?

 

[Prometheus]

And who ordered the dumping of such horrific chemicals on such peace loving people.

So, we agree that the dumping of agent orange was a horrific act by the United States. Do we also agree that the entire war was a horrific act?

Are you saying that you agree with me that the United States, and of course those in power who caused it to occur, commited atrocities in Vietnam and that the entire war was an American atrocity. Of course, those who were in power and promoted the war are most at fault.

 

[JohnDubYa]

You're not too swift at detecting sarcasm, are you Prometheus?

By the way, I figured you would jump all over my understanding of the Geneva Conventions. What gives?

 

[hiphys]

By the same token, much of what your government has told you about the war is (apparently) lies. Your country remains a dictatorship because of the US's failure to prevent it. I won't concede to the validity of the captions to any of those pictures without some real context.

Oh, russ_watters ,you are sitting in America and say that our country remains dictatorship.
It’s really funny ! Do you think so ? Please come to Vietnam to see what is happening here.
You said : “Your country remains a dictatorship because of the US's failure to prevent it.”
Please read what I had post before again to see what the US did to prevent it , ok ?
Let ‘s think about this : the Vietnamese dared to resist Chinese reigns , the French colonialists and the great United States , could the Vietnamese Communist Party still exist until now if they were dictatorship ? You shouldn’t discount us like that !
We all know that America is the super power of the world , but it doesn’t mean that America has the right to judge the world .Kenedy, Nixon , Bush… are American presidents, but not the world’s presidents.We have never voted for them.
Each country in the world, no matter how big it is, has its self-determination.Others should respect it.

Russ_watter, I think you are an American patriot, you love America, but in a wrong way.Many Americans love their country in other way.
I think that you know many of them :

Martin Luther King, Jr., said: “I opposed the war in Vietnam because I love America. I speak out against it, not in anger, but with anxiety and sorrow in my heart...This war is a blasphemy against all that America stands for.”

“In every other great war of this century, we have had the support of what is generally accepted as the decent opinion of mankind. We do not have that today.”
Eugene J. McCarthy (1916 - )
U.S. politician and writer, senator from Minnesota.
Referring to the Vietnam War (1959-1975).

“I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.

It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit, the emotions in the room, the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam, but they did. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told the stories [of] times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads … cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.”
…………………………
…………………………
“In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart.”

April 22, 1971, read before before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Kerry, John F. (1943- ), Democratic member of the United States Senate from Massachusetts

Russ_watter, you need some real context to concede to the validity of the captions to any of the pictures I gave , now you got it ! Or you still think that your presidential candidate told a lie ?
By the way, all of these quotations are from Microsoft Encarta 2004.Check it if you want.
Please don’t live a lie !

 

[hiphys]

Your pics show the brutalities of war (well, the one that shows up clearly), which the Geneva Convention is supposed to outlaw. Now who stated from the outset that they would not abide by the Geneva Convention?

If you are going to insinuate that the Viet Cong were peaceful people who never committed barbarity, feel free. I am not going to believe you.

What should we do when American troops killed our cititzens ? Smile peacefully and come to shake their hand ?
Feel free, I'm afraid that you are going to believe nothing, even yourself.

 

[JohnDubYa]

hiphys, if you published an article that was critical of the Communist Party, would the government allow it? What would happen to you?

And how does freedom of religion work in Vietnam? Does your government show respect for the Unified Buddhist Church? What has been happening to the senior leaders of this church?

By the way, hiphys, the real hero of the Left in this country are John F. Kennedy and LBJ. Do you have any quotes about the Vietnam War from these two? (Not a dig at you.)

One more thing, we need some information about the Geneva Convention. I asked Prometheus, but he seems to be quiet lately. Can you help him?

 

[kat]

hiphys...even Kerry has admitted that his statement that you quoted above was "over the top"...and of the 150 honest vet's he's taken statements from...many have been proven to be outright frauds, never even in vietnam and the rest were never actually substantiated. Maybe that's one quote you would be better off leaving out next time.

 

[hiphys]

Let’s talk about Lyndon Baines Johnson, 36th president of the United States

I suppose that Johnson was a hero in the World War II because of his bravery.( receiving a silver star for gallantry from General Douglas MacArthur.)

I suppose that Johnson was a hero in the War on Poverty in your country.

I suppose that Johnson was a hero in the War against racial discrimination in your country.

But :

“Johnson's stumbling leadership in foreign relations, especially in Vietnam, overshadowed his effective leadership in domestic affairs.”

By Robert Dallek, professor of history, Boston university, author of Lone Star Rising : Lyndon Johnson and his time, author of History Of Presidential Leadership (Microsoft Encarta 2004.)


“Both Johnson and his successor, Richard Milhous Nixon, used the power of the presidency to extend the Vietnam War and their control over affairs of state. Johnson gained sweeping authority to commit U.S. forces to defend South Vietnam after presenting inaccurate information to Congress about North Vietnamese bombing in the Gulf of Tonkin. Nixon, who pledged to bring peace in his 1968 presidential campaign, soon expanded the Vietnam War into neighboring Cambodia and Laos. At home he instituted wage and price controls. Nixon was the first president to establish an Office of Communications to control the flow of information in and out of the White House.”

By Stephen J. Wayne, professor of government at Georgetown University in Washington,
Understanding the Modern American Presidency, Microsoft Encarta 2004.


By 1968 antiwar sentiment affected electoral politics. Challenging Johnson for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota campaigned against the war. McCarthy roused fervent support among the young, and Vietnam swiftly became the major issue of the 1968 presidential race. Reconsidering his earlier policies, Johnson limited bombing in Southeast Asia and initiated peace talks with Hanoi and the NLF. After he was challenged by McCarthy in the New Hampshire primary, Johnson decided not to seek reelection and withdrew from the race. The president became a political casualty of the Vietnam War.
Contributed By:
Bill Turque , B.A ,freelance writer
Paul E. Johnson, B.A, M.A, Ph.D, professor of history, University of South Carolina.
Nancy Woloch , B.A, M.A, Ph.D, Adjunct Associate Professor of history ,Barnard College, Columbia University.
Microsoft Encatar 2004.

And
“Repeated predictions of victory from U.S. generals and Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara had proved wrong, and as the U.S. commitment grew, so did opposition to the war and to Johnson personally. By 1967 Johnson began avoiding public appearances because of demonstrations and threats to his life.”
Microsoft Encatar 2004.
What happened to your real hero after his decision to throw your country into an unjust war ?
I suppose that Vietnam War is the darkest stage of his life.
Or you are trying to rewrite the US History ?
What do you think about these :

“It takes twenty years or more of peace to make a man, it takes only twenty seconds of war to destroy him.”
Baudouin I (1930 - 1993)
Belgian monarch.

Lyndon Johnson came into office seeking a Great Society in America and found instead an ugly little war that consumed him.

Tom Wicker (1926 - )
U.S. writer.
Referring to the Vietnam War.

 

[hiphys]

"Kennedy had begun to consider the possibility of withdrawal from Vietnam and had even ordered the removal of 1,000 advisers shortly before he was assassinated, but Johnson increased the number of U.S. advisers to 27,000 by mid-1964. Even though intelligence reports clearly stated that most of the support for the NLF came from the south, Johnson, like his predecessors, continued to insist that North Vietnam was orchestrating the southern rebellion."

I suppose that Kenedy might not have thrown his country into this war if there hadn't been the assassination.
In Microsoft Encarta 2004 ,I found this :

Kennedy’s most significant foreign policy blunder came in his 1961 decision to send thousands of U.S. soldiers to Vietnam, sending the country along a path toward military defeat overseas and political turmoil at home.

© 1993-2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.