From: das@unislc.uucp (David Shorten)
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 22:00:05 GMT

vsg001@acad.drake.edu wrote:
: In article <1992Oct7.230146.2376@unislc.uucp>, das@unislc.uucp (David Shorten) writes:
: > vsg001@acad.drake.edu wrote:
: > Hmm..  Vince, buddy, I think you completely missed the point.  You implied
: > Clinton was afraid to defend his country.  We cannot infer anything of the
: > kind from his unwillingness to fight in Vietnam.  Our country was in no
: > way threatened with invasion by North Vietnam, so I don't know how you
: > could call what we did in Vietnam defense of our country.  And I don't 
: > think it was even legally a war.. I was under the impression we never did
: > declare war on North Vietnam, it was another of our famous police actions.
: 
: What a tangled web we weave... At the time, our government called the American
: military forces to prevent the spread of Communism, something that was believed
: to ultimately defend American interests, and therefore in defense of the US.
: You would have a *very* difficult time trying to explain to my Father and his
: friends (all veterans) that what they did, was not in defense of their country.

Hmm.. talk about tangled.. no matter what your father (or mine for that matter)
believe about what they were doing there, the above is a pretty tangled
justification for our military presence there.  One that many questioned at 
the time, and one that was borne out by history to be false.

I don't think many in the government even believed it, or we would have
tried a little harder to win the war.  And in the 15 or so years since
Vietnam became communist they have never been a threat to us, nor have
they even been a significant pawn in the struggle between the US and USSR.

: Clinton manipulated the draft system so that some one else went in his place.
: 
: *Cowardice: (kauardis) n. Lacking the capacity to meet danger without giving
: way to fear. (according to The New Lexicon Webster Dictionary)
: Hmm... how felicitous.
: 

Not wanting to risk death in a morally bankrupt cause is not cowardice in 
my book.  We cannot know what he would have done in the case of the US
being at war with a real threat to our security.  I think that like most
reasonably patriotic Americans he would have fought to keep our country safe.

: Now this thing that there was not a Vietnam wsa not a war. How typical for
: liberals to try and avoid a subject with pathetic attempts to shroud an issue
: in NonPhilisophicPonderings such as if a fetus exists or not. (If you want
: education on this read anything that drieux writes) True, there was no formal
: declation but:
: 
: *War: (wor) n. armed conflict between nations, tribes, or other groups
: Again, you would be *very* hard pressed to explain to *any* veteran that
: Vietnam was not war.

I am not disputing that Vietnam was a war, I only intended to point out
how important it was to our government.  It was important enough to send
thousands of young American boys to risk their deaths, but not important
enough to try to push through congress a declaration of war.  Vietnam was
not, and never was considered a threat to US security!

And please don't go into any arguments about us being there to keep a free
people free.  The regimes we supported in South Vietnam were no more 
interested in the rights of their people than were the North Vietnamese.
:   
: > HERE endeth the lesson.
: Umm. No.
: --
: Here endith the Lesson
: --
: Disclaimers. Disclaimers.
: 		VSG001@acad.drake.edu (Vince Goddard-ARCH Conservative)
: ps there is a reason why I spell it "endith" but thats something different.


Ok, I'll bite, why do you spell it endith?

Dave S.
das@unislc.slc.unisys.com  -or-  das%unislc@uunet.uu.net

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections