From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: FOREVER GONE
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:35:46 GMT

In article <Bz9wJ3.7yr@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu
(Larry Jewell) writes:
>Dave, you sound like you've never been in danger and depended on men to
>cover your ass and have never had to do the same for them.  This is good,
>since it means men like me have done their job and done it well.

I don't see what on earth this comment has to do with this thread of
discussion.

>Those men deserve every chance to come home if possible, not be written
>off by people who have used them up and thrown them away.

No one is saying that searching will stop if the US changes its policy
toward Vietnam.  In fact, searches should get even easier if private US
citizens can more easily travel there, and it's not as if the Vietnamese
are going to put a halt to US military investigations if the US warms up
toward Vietnam.  Your statement just doesn't make any sense.

>You say the issue is "over-publicized"?

Yes, because it has been accepted virtually without comment in the press
that this is the chief official factor determining US policy toward Vietnam
for the last 3 years (since VN withdrew from Cambodia), because "false
sightings" receive an immense amount of press when they occur (and hardly
any when they are later determined to be false), and because the fact that
no one has found a single shred of credible evidence that any GI's remain
alive in Vietnam receives barely any mention in news articles on this
subject.

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to think there are any American
MIA's or POW's still held in Vietnam against their will.  You may continue
to hope privately that some will be found, and you will be more easily able
to go look for them in person if the US recognizes Vietnam, but it is
simply irrational for US policy to be based primarily on this hope, 20
years after the fact, and it is silly that the press blindly accepts this
situation.

>Why should we under-publicize it?

I never said we should ignore the issue, I only said that this issue
receives TOO MUCH emphasis in determining US policy toward Vietnam.

Imagine what US policy toward Germany or Japan would have been like if the
US demanded full accounting for the vastly larger numbers of US MIA's and
missing POW's from WWII, and how much worse off everyone would have been if
the US had consequently refused to help rebuild those countries after WWII.

>Would you accept being abandoned in some far-away land and hope that the
>US forgets the whole matter in order to make life more comfortable for the
>regime that holds you?

After 20 years, I would not expect any rational person to continue looking
for me.  Especially if somehow I knew that not a single trace of my
whereabouts had been found during that time.

>You want to forget about these men, I hope that the same gratitude is
>extended to you in some future scenario, with St. Peter as the star of the
>scene.
>
>Larry J

I NEVER SAID THIS.  Why don't you reply to what I actually wrote, and not
what you think I wrote?  I think you're getting wildly over-emotional.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war