"I am behind the troops, but.." = "I am not racist, but..."

[GePap]

Sikander:
at the end of your post you write down the name of a book. Are we to infer what you wrote was a quote from the book? If so, ae you the author of the book?

[Drogue]

Originally posted by elijah
Still, where did that Tequila go? *looks at Drogue's and Verres's livers*

Who me? I was driving Besides, not that much went. Your the one who claims drunkenness Weren't you teetotalling anyway? If not, shall we go out tonight to celebrate you and Verres getting back in?

[st_swithin]

Stupid hair trigger. I TOLD those guys I should have a safety on the Luge.

Send the Wolf in for cleanup - I've got a bit of a mess on my hands.

[Whaleboy]

Sounds like a plan! Except lack of money... not that I'm going to drink *cough* so sounds good!

Spellling Nazi: T-totalling

You were driving on red wine, tequila and champagne!

I was "loosened up", not drunk. Still, I felt a little slower than usual (understatement).

[Drogue]

Originally posted by elijah
Sounds like a plan! Except lack of money... not that I'm going to drink *cough* so sounds good!

So that's a no?

Originally posted by elijah
Spellling Nazi: T-totalling

No, it's teetotaling. Appears in the OED.

Originally posted by elijah
You were driving on red wine, tequila and champagne!

A few hours before, and not that much of it. It should have been out of my system by the time I drove, and I was under the legal limit anyway.

[Whaleboy]

So that's a no?

No. You just rang me anyway

No, it's teetotaling. Appears in the OED.

Oxford? Bah! What do they know?

A few hours before, and not that much of it. It should have been out of my system by the time I drove, and I was under the legal limit anyway.

It remains in your system, and if you were breathalised, it would have shown up.

[Whaleboy]

When do we think the troops will come home?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Tingkai

Odie, you made this claim yesterday, we asked for some proof, you haven't provided any. If there are tons of material from the Vietnam war period then post some links.

Yeah, like newspaper and magazine articles from the 19****ing60's and early 70's are routinely archived and readily searchable anywhere.

Were you alive then? Were you here in the US then? So all you're doing is taking an unsubstantiated claim (can't prove what people didn't do, especially on a large scale) that fits what you want to believe.

So what you're saying is that dozens of protesters would block the doors to major airports, throw garbage at people, and the airport officials would do nothing.

Nice spin. They didn't have to be "dozens." They didn't have to block the doors. They didn't have to all throw garbage. Verbal harassment, spitting, "accidentally" slamming into you, throwing stuff. There was a whole range of possibilities. And airports are big places, with small security staffs. You think there are armed guards every 50 feet? You're the one who is asserting that none of this ever happened, anywhere, and that anyone who says otherwise is lying.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Tingkai


It is not that they are lying, but rather their memory has changed.

A classic experiment is the Neisser's study of how people remembered the Challenger explosion. The day after the explosion, he had 100 university students write down exactly where and how they had heard about the explosion. About three years later, he interviewed 44 and asked them to remember that day. Only three people were able to provide the same answers to what they had written the day after the explosion.

About 10 of the students gave completely different answers, and even when shown their original answers, they couldn't remember it. In other words, new memories had replaced what actually happend.

Neisser tells how he has vivid memories of hearing about the attack on Pearl Harbour while listening to a baseball game. But of course that's impossible given the attack happened in December.

Kind of scary when you think about it. How accurate are our life memories? Not very it seems.

I'd say it's interesting, but not particularly relevant. In this experiment, you have a "major" (in the sense of newsworthy) event, that's actually relatively minor in these people's lives, it doesn't directly happen "to" them, it's simply a notable event, and people are asked to remember what is ordinarily trivial details about their surroundings.

That's a lot different from remembering the core elements of an event that happened directly to you, or directly affected you. Also, you can't say if it applies to these "decades later" recollections, unless you know for a fact that none of these later published recollections were based on documents at the time such as letters, journals, or diaries.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by elijah
When do we think the troops will come home?

Um -- when the occupation ends?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Ned:

1) The SDS was not a communist front. It was a radical student organization. There's a difference.

It was communist, with a small "c" in the words of one of their leaders. Here is a history of the SDS.

http://barksdale.uta.edu/undergrad2a.htm

The SDS, which was the anti-war movement, believed Vietnam was wrong because we were opposing communism. They were, in fact, on the other side in that war. Their action became increasingly violent. I would not be surprised if they deliberately spit or threw eggs and the like at returning Vets.

2) The election of '72 was a repudiation of McGovern, not an endorsement of Nixon. This is why Nixon's people wanted McGovern to get the nomination to begin with.

So what? The point remains. McGovern was the one who wanted to crawl on his belly to Hanoi to get peace. Nixon wanted peace on honorable terms and was willing to escallate until the communists gave it.

3) Nixon handling of the war included the secret bombings of Cambodia and military incursions into neutral Laos, both of which reinvigorated the protests. And why shouldn't they have? In a just world, Nixan and Kissinger would have found themselves at the Hague, on trial for war crimes.

Bull. Nixon went were the enemy was. The NVA base camps were in Cambodia. The Ho Chi Minh trail was in Laos. And rather than being secret, Nixon announced the incursions on TV with charts and graphs explaining what we were doing and why.

4) There is no inconsistancy between Nixon's re-election and his opponent's increasing vehemence. If anything, the former fueled the latter. As a point of comparison that should resonate with your conservative politics, you might want to consider how the re-election of Bill Clinton didn't silence his critics but instead pushed them over the edge until they were rabidly using every means at their deranged disposal to try to drive him from office.

What you mean to say is that Watergate did not die with the election. It continued to grow as an issue primarily because Nixon chose cover up the burglaries and its directors from his campaign staff, and later chose to cover up the cover up. All of this was unravelled by "Deep Throat."

Had Nixon not had Watergate, Vietnam would not have fallen. Clearly the fall of Nixon signaled the North Vietnamese to renew the conflict.

[Odin]

Ned, the people of Vietnam WANTED a communist government. The Vietnam War was a result of too many people in high placed being tricked into beleiving the domino effect BS, that crackpot Deim guy was proped up by the US even though he was violating human rights right and left. Read up a bit on your history, Ned, instead of reading conservative propaganda.

BTW, I think Tingkai is full of it, quit giving us a bad name with that crap, man.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Odin
Ned, the people of Vietnam WANTED a communist government. The Vietnam War was a result of too many people in high placed being tricked into beleiving the domino effect BS, that crackpot Deim guy was proped up by the US even though he was violating human rights right and left. Read up a bit on your history, Ned, instead of reading conservative propaganda.

BTW, I think Tingkai is full of it, quit giving us a bad name with that crap, man.

Odin, I don't have to read up on much of that history since I remember it.

I agree that the elections scheduled in the mid 50's were postponed because Ho Chi Minh would have won.

Even if the people in high places believed in the Domino Effect, the reason the SDS opposed the war was because they actually favored the other side because it was communist, not because the Domino Effect was incorrect.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Nice spin. They didn't have to be "dozens." They didn't have to block the doors. They didn't have to all throw garbage.

Oerdin is the one claiming that there were protests at the airport that occurred every day for months, not me.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Sikander
I even attended an anti-war protest (the incursion into Cambodia in 1970 was the reason for this protest) as an observer.

I was 9 years old in 1970 and rapidly came to one conclusion. There wasn't a single person that I met who was an anti-war activist who knew the first thing about Vietnam, American Forces, Asia or really anything germain to the discussion

Whereas you, the nine-year-old, were an expert.