7 ms·

It's a bit strange that we are remembering the "hero" but not the 500 or so innocent vietnamese men, women, children and infants who were raped, tortured and/or

by qubax 8y ago

It's a bit strange that we are remembering the "hero" but not the 500 or so innocent vietnamese men, women, children and infants who were raped, tortured and/or killed. Strange how we always have to make ourselves the good guys. The "heroes". If you look at the war photos. You'll see infants. Such a horrific war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre It's also strange that we say this is the worst event in vietnam war, when we dropped napalm on people ( chemically burning them to death ) and more than 4 million people were killed in that terrible war. God knows how many vietnamese women and children were raped. My Lai was one of thousands of my lai incidents in vietnam.

mc32 8y ago
Isn’t that how it usually works. Japan remembers its war dead, we remember ours. They rember their heroes, we remember ours. Same for Soviets, Germans, British, French, Spanish, Philipinoes, Indians, Pakistanis, etc..
- groestl 8y ago
  Since you mention the Germans: Their process of working through the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung") very much includes remembering the victims, massacres and non-heros, as well as embarrassement and remorse, while spending very little energy discussing the actions of positive figures. And even they are seldomly described as "heroes" ("Helden"), probably to avoid any ambiguity regarding the responsibility of the German people for the horrible events. Alas, Germany might be unique in that regard.
  - srean 8y ago
    I have the utmost regard for Germany. I cant think of another example where the entire country acknowledged their own wrongdoings with sincerity. I have no skin in the game, but in some weird way it makes me feel proud for them
    - wnkrshm 8y ago
      Sadly these days we have a lot of alt-right people arguing that this kind of working through the past has made us weak. In terms of WW2 they argue for recognition of all the German civilian dead in WW2. The irony of trying to push for sympathy for German refugees in the war and at the same time disregarding the humanity of Syrian refugees is lost on them.
hluska 8y ago
I see what you're saying here. But unfortunately, civilians get massacred in wars. If you laud the people who stop the massacres as heroes, you hopefully increase the odds of someone stopping the next massacre. Finally, Hugh Thompson absolutely is a hero. Your quotes around that word are unnecessary.
- Synaesthesia 8y ago
  Yes civilians do die in wars but the conduct of the US forces in South east Asia was pretty reprehensible by any measure. Particularly if you’ve read “Kill anything that moves” by Nick Turse
  - hluska 8y ago
    I completely agree - US forces behaved terribly during the Vietnam war. Sadly, I can't think of a war where civilians didn't get massacred. Maybe not to the same extent as in Vietnam, but massacres happen. The truly fucked up part is that there are likely many massacres that have never been reported.
    - Svettie 8y ago
      Ok, so if you agree, there is no need to give the caveat "massacres happen". I recognize that you don't mean anything by it and it's a natural response when you are somehow associated with something icky to try and rationalize it. Still, it comes off as trying to soften the significance. If this was a discussion of war crimes perpetrated by some other country, would you feel compelled to point out that "massacres happen"? Americans committed the crimes, and America is responsible, period. Let's not try to blunt it. There's a measure of humility to be gained here, if we look for it, instead of a way to save face.
      - hluska 8y ago
        I'm sorry, but you completely missed the point of what I was saying. I'm not American, so I have nothing to save face for. And 'massacres happen' is not a caveat, it is a fact. Civilians get massacred in every single war. And the military organizations involved still try to cover it up. Consider the Haditha massacre in Iraq in 2008. A group of US Marines killed 24 civilians. And yet, despite all the tough talk about My Lai and how it's completely unacceptable, two things came out of Haditha: - the US military tried to cover it up as soon as it happened. - nobody served any time for their role in the massacre. And again, as I said to conclude my last post. "The truly fucked up part is that there are likely many massacres that have never been reported." I don't understand how that constitutes rationalizing something. Rather, as a society, we must celebrate the people who stop these massacres and human rights violations because they still happen. They have always happened.
baddox 8y ago
See also: people who claim that the atomic bombings of Japan saved lives, and the people who claim that white people deserve credit for being the people who ended slavery in the United States.
- captain_perl 8y ago
  As a student of WW2, millions of Japanese lives were saved by the atomic bombs: 1) Japanese military leaders were planning to continue fighting until no citizens were left: "even if the Japanese people die, their spirit will live on." Surrender rates in previous island battles were on the order of 1% (ie. 99% killed or seriously injured.) 2) the Japanese people were facing starvation had the war continued. The early surrender helped with the rebuilding effort and prevented the nation from literally starving to death. 3) American leaders chose to bomb secondary cities, rather than completely destroy Tokyo, a capital city 4) had Russia invaded Japan, they typically would de-industrialize the enemy by transporting power plants and other facilities back to Russia 5) Japan actually refused to surrender to the USA. The emperor's broadcast never used the word, and the leader who signed the surrender document was approx. #10 in the leadership hierarchy. The emperor was a serious amateur microbiologist and realized what an atomic bomb was, so did not need convincing that the war was lost. (He was against starting the war with China and the USA and said so, but faced assassination and constitutional issues if he made a serious effort to change sentiment.)
  - Synaesthesia 8y ago
    This is not true, serious military figures in the US armed forces concluded that Japan was utterly defeated and was making peace feelers. They were basically defenseless at that stage of the war, against the bombing raids. The civilian massacre could have been prevented by merely demonstrating the bomb. However they chose to experiment by dropping it on an city.
    - kungtotte 8y ago
      Two cities. They didn't stop at one, they did it twice.
fit2rule 8y ago
All of America's wars since Vietnam have been horrific war. You should put as much energy into observing the victims of Americas illegal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, too .. America hasn't stopped killing innocent children. Americans, however, have stopped caring about it.

by qubax 8y ago

mc32 8y ago

Isn’t that how it usually works. Japan remembers its war dead, we remember ours. They rember their heroes, we remember ours. Same for Soviets, Germans, British, French, Spanish, Philipinoes, Indians, Pakistanis, etc..

groestl 8y ago
Since you mention the Germans: Their process of working through the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung") very much includes remembering the victims, massacres and non-heros, as well as embarrassement and remorse, while spending very little energy discussing the actions of positive figures. And even they are seldomly described as "heroes" ("Helden"), probably to avoid any ambiguity regarding the responsibility of the German people for the horrible events. Alas, Germany might be unique in that regard.
- srean 8y ago
  I have the utmost regard for Germany. I cant think of another example where the entire country acknowledged their own wrongdoings with sincerity. I have no skin in the game, but in some weird way it makes me feel proud for them
  - wnkrshm 8y ago
    Sadly these days we have a lot of alt-right people arguing that this kind of working through the past has made us weak. In terms of WW2 they argue for recognition of all the German civilian dead in WW2. The irony of trying to push for sympathy for German refugees in the war and at the same time disregarding the humanity of Syrian refugees is lost on them.

hluska 8y ago

I see what you're saying here. But unfortunately, civilians get massacred in wars. If you laud the people who stop the massacres as heroes, you hopefully increase the odds of someone stopping the next massacre. Finally, Hugh Thompson absolutely is a hero. Your quotes around that word are unnecessary.

Synaesthesia 8y ago
Yes civilians do die in wars but the conduct of the US forces in South east Asia was pretty reprehensible by any measure. Particularly if you’ve read “Kill anything that moves” by Nick Turse
- hluska 8y ago
  I completely agree - US forces behaved terribly during the Vietnam war. Sadly, I can't think of a war where civilians didn't get massacred. Maybe not to the same extent as in Vietnam, but massacres happen. The truly fucked up part is that there are likely many massacres that have never been reported.
  - Svettie 8y ago
    Ok, so if you agree, there is no need to give the caveat "massacres happen". I recognize that you don't mean anything by it and it's a natural response when you are somehow associated with something icky to try and rationalize it. Still, it comes off as trying to soften the significance. If this was a discussion of war crimes perpetrated by some other country, would you feel compelled to point out that "massacres happen"? Americans committed the crimes, and America is responsible, period. Let's not try to blunt it. There's a measure of humility to be gained here, if we look for it, instead of a way to save face.
    - hluska 8y ago
      I'm sorry, but you completely missed the point of what I was saying. I'm not American, so I have nothing to save face for. And 'massacres happen' is not a caveat, it is a fact. Civilians get massacred in every single war. And the military organizations involved still try to cover it up. Consider the Haditha massacre in Iraq in 2008. A group of US Marines killed 24 civilians. And yet, despite all the tough talk about My Lai and how it's completely unacceptable, two things came out of Haditha: - the US military tried to cover it up as soon as it happened. - nobody served any time for their role in the massacre. And again, as I said to conclude my last post. "The truly fucked up part is that there are likely many massacres that have never been reported." I don't understand how that constitutes rationalizing something. Rather, as a society, we must celebrate the people who stop these massacres and human rights violations because they still happen. They have always happened.

baddox 8y ago

See also: people who claim that the atomic bombings of Japan saved lives, and the people who claim that white people deserve credit for being the people who ended slavery in the United States.

captain_perl 8y ago
As a student of WW2, millions of Japanese lives were saved by the atomic bombs: 1) Japanese military leaders were planning to continue fighting until no citizens were left: "even if the Japanese people die, their spirit will live on." Surrender rates in previous island battles were on the order of 1% (ie. 99% killed or seriously injured.) 2) the Japanese people were facing starvation had the war continued. The early surrender helped with the rebuilding effort and prevented the nation from literally starving to death. 3) American leaders chose to bomb secondary cities, rather than completely destroy Tokyo, a capital city 4) had Russia invaded Japan, they typically would de-industrialize the enemy by transporting power plants and other facilities back to Russia 5) Japan actually refused to surrender to the USA. The emperor's broadcast never used the word, and the leader who signed the surrender document was approx. #10 in the leadership hierarchy. The emperor was a serious amateur microbiologist and realized what an atomic bomb was, so did not need convincing that the war was lost. (He was against starting the war with China and the USA and said so, but faced assassination and constitutional issues if he made a serious effort to change sentiment.)
- Synaesthesia 8y ago
  This is not true, serious military figures in the US armed forces concluded that Japan was utterly defeated and was making peace feelers. They were basically defenseless at that stage of the war, against the bombing raids. The civilian massacre could have been prevented by merely demonstrating the bomb. However they chose to experiment by dropping it on an city.
  - kungtotte 8y ago
    Two cities. They didn't stop at one, they did it twice.

fit2rule 8y ago

All of America's wars since Vietnam have been horrific war. You should put as much energy into observing the victims of Americas illegal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, too .. America hasn't stopped killing innocent children. Americans, however, have stopped caring about it.