I think I've spotted some revisionism, but I'm going to ask the old timers that read this if they remember events in the way I got the impression of it going down.
The modern take in the media I've seen lately is chants of "Hey, Hey, LBJ! How many kids you killed today?" is a reference to the 'kids' in the form of an 18 year old American conscript, dying in Viet Nam. Sorta dovetails with modern sentiment insisting on respecting and supporting the troops.
But that's not what I remember. That wasn't what I came away from the recollections in school and otherwise in the 70s and 80s. My impression is those chanters DIDN'T support or respect conscripts that acquiesced to service and went war when their country called. They hated soldiers, those protesters. When they worried about kids LBJ was 'killing' they were worried about Vietnamese kids. They called the soldier "Baby Killers" after all. But in the end, turning against their fellow citizens that were just doing their duty and obeying the law was a losing proposition for the protesters, PR-wise. And now they change their tune and rewrite history.
Or am I off base? LBJ was killing American men young enough to be kids, or LBJ was killing Vietnamese children?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Protesters spat on returned soldiers, many who didn't want to go in the first place.
A lot of PTSD came from the non-welcome the young men received.
So yeah, it was more jane fonda than yellow ribbons.
It was the latter. The only "kids" worth protesting on behlef of were the ones wearing black pajamas who were trying to kill our troops. To the American hippie left, any American who went into the military was to be shunned and despised and often literally spit on.
Now many of those hippies teach in our schools because over the decades, actual productive work has always managed to elude them. Very sad.
The media made much of the anti-war movement, the 'babies' were really supposed to be the babies and children American soldiers and Marines were killing. Having swum in the river with some of the children in Vietnam, their battle scars were pretty bad, their smiles and laughter were better. Most of MY problem with Vietnam War was the MSM and losing it for no good reason - no good came of American departure from the conflict.
I am 42, and feel very ashamed for the way OUR country treated Vets back then. It was the beginning of the rise of the "progressives" that now are ruining this country for good!
Well, the Commies started off supporting Uncle Ho and the poor oppressed Vietnamese people LBJ was slaughtering ( and before Putin came to Power and closed them, the KGB Archives revealed that the Soviets WERE backing the Anti-War Movement to the Hilt). But when a bunch of soldiers came back and started Vietnam Veterans Against the War, there was a little confusion in the ranks of the Reds. But by the time they straightened things out, LBJ realized he wasn't the Great American President, and quit. By then, the Commies had added another tactic, i.e. Prevention: Yelling and spitting at the outgoing troops, blocking Recruiting Stations, trying to get ROTC off campuses (think Kent State), etc. So basically, the Commies hated the American Soldiers for their very existence, even if there were Vets protesting with them. This attitude continues to this day. Look at all the movies that came out in the 60s/70s/80s about the "Crazy Nam Vets", i.e. Deer Hunter, Apocalypse Now, et.al., plus look at all the Old 60's Radicals in the Government today.
For a much clearer picture of those who served in the 'Nam, I recommend HIGHLY Christian G. Appy's "Working-Class War" (copyright 1993 University of North Carolina Press). Very nice historical study that breaks the Myth that the Soldiers were picked to go the Big Green Machine by Race, when it was mostly the guys who weren't Rich enough to Dodge the Draft.
Hope this helps.
I agree with Earl and Bubblehead... I was spit on and called baby killer coming back in 74 at SFO...
Hell, I was born the year before the fall of Saigon, and I understood that chant to refer to "our Asian Bretheren", not the soliders in harm's way.
It doesn't surprise me that we have always been at war with eastasia now, however.
So either wishful thinking from the 'geniuses' of the modern Left, or nefarious rewrite of the narrative to cast themselves in a better light.
Damn hippies
Liberals have no sense of history so think it is easy to re-write.
Most Liberals think History started on 22 November 1963.
Older Libs may hold warm memories of FDR but for the younger ones Clinton is an historical figure.
We and they simply can not reach "mutual understanding" as there is a total lack of common ground.
Case in point: Liberal customer waxed rhapsodic about how the GM/Chrysler bail out was going to make things so much better. I asked "What was your favorite British Leland car?"
Blank stare. Total lack of understanding due to a huge void in historical knowledge.
I was called "baby killer" a few times in ROTC (graduated and commissioned in 1973). Both times it was a (different) professor at the university. So I also believe that the protesters were referring to Vietnamese kids. But, hey, history is a living document, right?
Post a Comment