HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: isc10295@nusunix1.nus.sg (QUEK KENG OEI)
Subject: Re: A klick
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 08:47:16 GMT

Monte Olsen (olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu) wrote:
: In article <1d706nINN3jb@bigboote.WPI.EDU> George M.
: Berberian, hunter@wpi.WPI.EDU writes:
: >I don't think there is an accurate account of what
: soldiers went through.
: >Only to each soldier that was there.
: >One book that was fairly close was, i thought, Rumor of
: War. The author
: >escapes me at the moment. I read this book several years
: ago. It was
: >accurate to a point. I could relate to several points the
: book brought
: >out.
: >
: >-- 
: >..................................../*\................
: ...................
: >George M.Berberian                                  
: College Computer Center
: >hunter@wpi.wpi.edu (email)                      
: Worcester Polytechnic Inst.
: >GMBERBERIAN@jake                                   
: Worcester, Massachusetts
: 
: George,
: I think the author's name is Phillip Caputo, but I'm not
: sure. I read the book too. Wasn't in the Marines, but some
: scenes struck a cord with me.

--
Yep!  It is by Phillip J Caputo.  He served in Vietnam as US Army
officer.
                                                                       _______
 +---------------------------------------+   |   \    | | |  |  |  |  /   __  \
 |Disclaimer:   All the above comments/  |   | |\ \   | | |  |  |  |  |  |  \__|
 |opinions/views made are my own.  They  |   | | \ \  | | |  |  |  |  \   \
 |do not in any way reflect any official |   | |  \ \ | | |  |  |  |   \   \
 |policy, view or stand on any subject   |   | |   \ \| | |  |  |  |  __\   \
 |by the National University of Singapore|   | |    \   | |  |  |  | /  \\   \
 |blah, blah, blah, etc, etc, etc        |   | |     \  | |  |--|  | |  |_|  |
 +---------------------------------------+   |_|      \_| |________| \_______/
_____________+_________________________________+________________________________
Keng-Oei Quek| internet : quekkeng@iscs.nus.sg | BITNET:quekkeng@nusdiscs.bitnet
-------------+---------------------------------+--------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: quoctp@cs.toronto.edu (Quoc Tuan Pham)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 6 Nov 92 04:04:38 GMT

drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:

>The burden of proof is on you: you're the one asserting this point.

>>I'll probably make you angry with this, too. I wish we could have somehow
>>earned the support of the people over there. They deserved much better
>>than they got--not from us, but from Hanoi. 

>Yes, it's a shame they didn't appreciate our efforts to brutalize them with
>free-fire zones, carpet bombing, defoilation, and our support for the South
>Vietnamese police state.
>-- 

I got the following definition from Webster's:

police state n. A political unit in which the government exercises rigid 
  and repressive controls over the social, economic, and political life, 
  esp. by means of a secret police force.

This is a far cry from what the Republic of South Vietnam was. Could
you not be so emotional the next time?

Do you have any opposition to carpet bombing of the jungles where
the NVA were? 
  


Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@melodian.cs.uiuc.edu (Dave Kohr)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: CS Dept., Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:18:27 GMT

In article <BxF3u2.358@cs.uiuc.edu> drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:
>The figure I have heard most commonly for US casualties is more like
>68,000 dead.

Ooops, make that 58,000.
-- 
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.vietnam
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:38:20 GMT

In article <JTURNER.92Nov7210821@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>, jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner) writes:
> emotional tenor of the time, do Kent State and the Chicago 7
> ring a bell, what would you expect?  Supporters of the war
> didn't exactly treat the protestors with kid gloves.
> 
> 				--Jeff Turner
> 



OK, I've tried to stay out of this arguement, but the above statement send
me through the roof.  I suppose those innocent children who were peacefully
protesting the war by beating up fellow colledge students who were members 
of the ROTC were using kid gloves.  Why did they beat up the ROTC members,
because they couldn't afford colledge themselfs, so they set the military
pay part of their tuition???  None of those ROTC students were "baby killers"
they were just trying to get an education.

Now to discuss the buildings that were burned/ransacked/vandalized were the
innocent children using kid gloves when they did these things????  For 20
years I've heard about how the slobbering, rawmeat eating, bloodlusting,
national guard came in and wontinly slaughtered the protesters.  They were
not protesters, they were vandals and rioters, and when you start violence,
you should expect violence to be returned.

The news reports I heard said 8 to 10 national guardsmen were injured, and
every single one was BEFORE a shot was fired.  The guardsmen were defending
a building (campus property) that the rioters wanted to destroy, while the
rioters threw pop bottles, beer cans, rocks and anything else they could find,
because they thought they were safe and could do anything they wanted.  They
never expected to be fired on.  SUPRIZE!!!

The news media before the shooting showed the destructive nature of the
rioters, but after the deaths pprtrayed them as innocents.  Why you might
ask?  Because it makes a better news story.  That's why.

Well, I'll stop foaming at the mouth now, and hopefully my blood pressure 
will drop back below 300.

Larry Billings
From: baldwin@csservera.scs.usna.navy.mil (J.D. Baldwin)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Stockdale at the debate
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:02:57 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. Dep't., U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD
In-reply-to: dzik@access.digex.com's message of 05 Nov 92 12:39:20 -0400

In article <Bx94xL.BE7@access.digex.com> dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph
Dzikiewicz) writes:
>>Stockdale is a retired pilot, and pilots don't often give speeches in
>>front of large crowds like he had to at the debate.
>
>He's also a university president.  Presumably that involves at least
>some public speaking.

He is not a university president.  He is a fellow at the Hoover
Institution at Stanford University, but he is not the president.

He has been the president of the U.S. Naval War College in Newport,
RI.  I believe that the dates of this appointment were 1978-1980.

He is an OUTSTANDING public speaker, no question about it.  I don't
know what happened to him in the debates, but informed opinion on this
subject is universal:  VADM Stockdale is a very accomplished public
speaker.  I have seen him speak five or six times, most recently in
1990.
--
 From the catapult of:              |+| "If anyone disagrees with anything I
   _,_  J. D. Baldwin, Comp Sci Dept|+| say, I am quite prepared not only to
 _|70|___:::)=}-  U.S. Naval Academy|+| retract it, but also to deny under
 \      /   baldwin@usna.navy.mil   |+| oath that I ever said it." --T. Lehrer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: khong@CS.ColoState.EDU (tuan khong)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 08:45:26 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

In article <JTURNER.92Nov6181803@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner) writes:
>In article <1992Nov06.213752.14873@bnr.ca> jarthur@bnr.ca (John Thompson) writes:
>
>> Could you, given two aerial photographs of Arlington National Cemetery, one
>> taken before the war and one taken yesterday, distinguish those areas filled
>> with American servicemen who died in Vietnam?  Were they all evil American
>> war planners, or is it possible that many of them were poor ignorant bastards
>> whose families had to live with the consequences of their being in the wrong
>> place at the wrong time?
>>  Regardless of who was right or wrong, there were terrible consequences for
>> the people on both sides.  Only a complete asshole would imply otherwise.
>
>	50,000 American dead vs. 3 million Vietnamese dead.  And it
>was US policy which contributed much more to the continuation of
>the war.  When SV President Diem Bien Phu wanted American troops to
>withdraw and to negotiate a settlement, the US backed the coup which
>killed him.  So much for SV democracy.  That, along with everything
>else SV had to be destroyed to be saved.
>
>> "The strategy, fortunately, did not work."  Fortunately for whom?  You must
>>mean fortunately for all right-thinking people.  I commend you on your command
>> of the English language, you just need to brush up on your rhetoric.
>
>	Fortunately for the large number of Vietnamese who opposed
>the US neo-colonialism.  The US has no right to run the world, and
>the Vietnamese certainly showed that.
>
>					--Jeff  Turner

Jeff,
   I think you got the SV president's name (Ngo Dinh Diem) and the place
(Dien Bien Phu) mixed up.
   And I couldn't see how it can be fortunate for the people who "opposed
the US neo-colonialism," because if there's such a group of people, they
must have suffered just as much due to the failure of the strategy which 
might have lead to the fall of SV...
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jarthur@bnr.ca (John Thompson)
Subject: Re: South VNese support for US intervention (was Re: Stockdale...)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx.
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1992 17:32:15 GMT

In article <Bx9LIv.9ry@cs.uiuc.edu> drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:
>
>My point is that a large part of the reason why the US could not garner
>support in the South was because US forces were rendering significant
>portions of the country uninhabitable.  If you don't want your ideas
>questioned, don't post them on USENET.
>

Just out of curiosity...are you old enough to remember the war?  Are you
stating your own views based on witnessed events or the reports of those
events viewed in the context of that time?  Do you or did you have a stake
in any of this?

Or are these someone else's ideas?  Out of a book you read, or perhaps from
a professor in a course you took?

It doesn't really matter, of course, but since you brought up the topic of
questioning ideas I thought I'd pursue it.

As for myself, I'm far more interested in the honest ideas and feelings 
stated by participants, including many of the authors who have published 
on the subject.  People who merely state the views of others for the sake 
of argument bore the hell out of me.  Feel free to question my ideas.

John Thompson
jarthur@jamatx.lonestar.org 
jarthur@BNR.CA

Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,talk.politcs.misc
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Which Peace Movement?
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:22:04 GMT

knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen) writes:
]  
] -My previous postings showed that few protesters were hooked in 
] psychological warfare and betrayed their fellows ? Your feeling now is as
] result of that deceit. If few among the public could recognize that they 
] should welcome home servicemen with joy because that was what they wanted. 
] The matter is on the contrary. The peace movement was selfish; they did
] not do it for the sake of their fellows or patriotism, but for themselves. They
] were proud to be militant and proud to say NO. Some of them tried to go 
] to Soviets and showed their just and militant heart of energetic 
] youngsters. They did know that they were playing with fire and the enemy
] whose goal and life are to destroy the society peace activists took for
] granted.
] 


I have to disagree here.

There was no ONE peace movement.

As I have tried to point out, and folks like to forget:

BOTH LBJ and Richard Nixon ran their respective campaigns
on 'ending the war in vietnam.'

Also there was a wide range of folks who were 'opposed to the war'
ranging from 'constitutionalists' who totally disagree with the
Presidential userption of Congressional Power to declare war, 
through the 'persons of conscience' who are opposed to the use
of arms - and make good medics - through the average WhiteBread
like Dan Quayle who Found Legitimate Ways to avoid the war.

So its NOT just some simple homogenous group of fuzzy
headed liberals....

ciao
drieux


-- 
Modern Day Problems:
Hickory, Dickory, Dock - Three Mice Ran up a Clock
The Clock Struct one, 
and the Other Two will be Upgraded In the Next Release.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen)
Subject: What does that word "wrong" mean ?
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 04:56:06 GMT

The first time, the world sees a sober leader of Soviets acknowledges that 
communism is "wrong".

What does that word "wrong" mean to Vietnam and people who once tried to 
prove it and had willing to help like they did in South Korea ? 

Here is the account originated from "that dead wrong" :

- About 250,000 ARVN dead and 600,000 wounded

-Viet-cong and North Vietnamese with 900,000 dead and 2,000,000 wounded.

-Around 50,000 US servicemen killed in action and 305,000 wounded.

Based on this account, it can demonstrate that :

-South Vietnam had will to resist. The result is it is a loser. Did they 
know they were right and their invaders wrong ? They did know that there
must be uncomfortable to live under communist regime of Ho-Chi-Minh.
Unfortunately, they could not wait to hear confession.

-North Vietnam,as bull-dog, did not like to rebuild its war-torn country 
and pushed young men to die so that communism can be flourished. After burning 
two generations of their fellows, they are numbed when seeing the communist 
world collapses and don't want to hear that authoritative confession.

How can they accept that ? No one wants to accept his mistakes. Why does no 
one 
tell them back up ? Because they don't have the opposition. So, just go 
ahead and lead their fellows towards infinitive of suffering and poverty.

-US servicemen who are the forefront of any policy of their government 
which has been elected by their own people did their duty as any soldiers
in any states. What they did in Vietnam is just the same goal their 
predecessors had done in Korea. They died not in vain.

One thing is some Administration is so far ahead of its public few of which
has not much info. As result, some damage has been done. But at last, US
won. No doubt about this.


Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Tet again
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:16:56 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.014527.27011@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>I think he is trying to show that the popular myth of the war as an
>insurgency is incorrect, and he is correct. It was an insurgency before
>1954, but by the time the US got involved it was subversion and invasion.

The US was "involved" before 1954, as it was bankrolling a large portion of
the French counter-insurgency effort.  The US was also "involved" between
1954 and 1965 (when it first sent tens of thousands of combat troops to
Vietnam, and when North Vietnamese regular army units first started to
appear in the South), as it gave extensive military and economic aid to the
Diem regime and its successors.

You must mean "involved" in the very narrow sense of "having troops engaged
in combat".

>it certainly casts a shadow on the assertions of the anti-war movement
>about the VC.

What were these assertions?  Who made them, and at what times?

>It also shows what a terrible job the media did in informing the public of
>the true facts of the Tet Offensive.
>-- 
>John Moore john@anasazi.com

About what "true facts" regarding Tet was the public misinformed?
-- 
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.vietnam
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:53:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.205719.3543@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
> In article <1992Nov10.173820.25529@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
> >
> >The news media before the shooting showed the destructive nature of the
> >rioters, but after the deaths pprtrayed them as innocents.  Why you might
> >ask?  Because it makes a better news story.  That's why.
> >
> Maybe its because some of the people shot were not involved in the protest.

Yes, they were strolling along the street and decided "Why don't we just 
walk through this rioting crowd?".  I DON"T THINK SO!!!

Or maybe the bullets bounced off the hard heads of the protesters, flew half a
mile and hit innocent bystanders.  If you were in the crowd of rioters, you
are just as guilty as the guy who broke the first window.  And how did they get shot if they weren't at the scene (ie. in the crowd). The shooting was into
the crowd.

Larry Billings
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)


Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: durham@mpr.ca (Paul Durham)
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 21:56:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.155332.8575@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.205719.3543@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov10.173820.25529@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>> >
>> >The news media before the shooting showed the destructive nature of the
>> >rioters, but after the deaths pprtrayed them as innocents.  Why you might
>> >ask?  Because it makes a better news story.  That's why.
>> >
>> Maybe its because some of the people shot were not involved in the protest.

>Yes, they were strolling along the street and decided "Why don't we just 
>walk through this rioting crowd?".  I DON"T THINK SO!!!

>Or maybe the bullets bounced off the hard heads of the protesters, flew half a
>mile and hit innocent bystanders.  If you were in the crowd of rioters, you
>are just as guilty as the guy who broke the first window.  And how did they get shot if they weren't at the scene (ie. in the crowd). The shooting was into
>the crowd.

>Larry Billings


Given that the amount of investigation and documentation regarding the
shootings at Kent State, I find it rather sad that anyone could sincerely
hold the above opinion.

The fact, as concluded from photographs and testimony from eyewitnesses,
is the the National Guard simply panicked and opened fire more or less at
random. 

In case you haven't figured it out, the shooting took place on a university
campus. Go to a university some time. See all the people walking around ?
Now imagine what would happen if a bunch of fellows started shooting at
anything that moved.

One of the people killed was an ROTC student, for Christ's sake. Do you 
think he was "rioting" ? Others were simply walking to class as far as a
quarter mile from the action.

In case you're wondering, yes I remember this quite well from when it
happened. If you can't, go do some research and find out for yourself.


Paul


-- 
Paul Durham                    |      durham@mprgate.mpr.ca
MPR Teltech Ltd                | durham%mprgate.mpr.ca@ubc-cs.uucp
8999 Nelson Way                | ...uunet!ubc-cs!mprgate.mpr.ca!durham
Burnaby, B.C., Canada. V5A 4B5 |      phone: (604) 293-6035    
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: How to do the Art Noir Ad Hominiem
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:36:02 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.083638.4950@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux,
just drieux) writes:
>] In article <1992Nov8.212723.25899@emr1.emr.ca> knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim
>] Nguyen) writes:
>] > But I tell you that I dream to see Communist Vietnam die.
>] 
>] To anyone reading Kim's postings, this admission should serve as a warning
>] signal regarding the accuracy and completeness of the historical facts
>] presented and the biases reflected in the conclusions reached.
>] -- 
>] Dave Kohr     drk@cs.uiuc.edu
>
>I think folks that this is a LOVELY and EXCELLENT piece of classic Art
>Noir Ad Hominiem!!!!
>
>ciao
>drieux

drieux, in the rush to abuse his/her/its <Shift> key and bombard us with
yet another drawn-out piece of failed sarcastic drivel, has totally
overlooked the fact that Kim has openly admitted to an overwhelming
anti-Communist bias, from which one can quite reasonably infer that Kim's
postings reflect this bias.  No _ad hominem_ here.

Perhaps drieux should spend more time attempting to comprehend postings
than sniping at them (with poor marksmanship in this case, I would add).

>ps: would you care to bring any of your decadent western cultural deviancy
>with you into the PureLand of Communism?

Once again, drieux demonstrates a total disdain for logic: opposition to
fighting on behalf of one side in a war is not equivalent to endorsement of
the policies of the other.
-- 
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.vietnam
From: drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: Stockdale is a Bumbling Idiot
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Comp Sci, Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:34:17 GMT

In article <SMITTIE.92Nov9122215@tui.csulb.edu> smittie@beach.csulb.edu
(Smittie) writes:
>Monte Olsen <olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu> wrote:
>>Your arrogance is astounding.
>
>Not nearly as astounding as your ignorance.
>
>smittie

Come on, hurling insults will not make anyone either more humble or
better-informed.
-- 
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.vietnam
From: Monte Olsen <olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu>
Subject: Re: Effects of US war protestors (was Re: Stockdale....)
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A7204DD44402A70D@reynolde-mac.ads.orst.edu>
X-Xxdate: Fri, 6 Nov 92 00:29:08 GMT
Organization: OSU Extension Service
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:27:41 GMT

In article
<JTURNER.92Nov6181803@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>
Jeffrey Turner, jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu
writes:
>	Fortunately for the large number of Vietnamese who
opposed
>the US neo-colonialism.  The US has no right to run the
world, and
>the Vietnamese certainly showed that.
>
I'll be thinking of the names of my brothers on that wall
and how you couldn't come up to their boot tops
intellectually or otherwise.

Monte