Sorry, this can go no further, you CHOSE not to believe
anything you like, but I was there at the incidents described.
Perhaps it was a local phenomena, we were told otherwise.
The Media would cover Demonstrations, but never showed
the violence! I believe many demonstrations were staged! (Phony)

Your opinions are yours to hold dear.
My memories are painful reminders that it is not a perfect world.

I did not say My brother was on a civilian airline in a war zone.
That was your error!
It happened when he boarded a flight at SFO on his way to PHX!
BTW: He doesn't talk about it with strangers either, not knowing
what to expect as a reaction. You clearly have a difficulty
understanding what I have written, probably due to the wide gulf
between our experiences. I understand.

I do not have an obligation to explain or convince you.
Also I do not care to burst your bubble.
Or to break your rose colored glasses. So I will not continue,
didn't meant to get sucked into this line of discussion anyway.
The direction this has taken is not in the topic of the radio group,
and I am leaving the group since it has produced nothing of value
or interest to me.

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Roger Gt" wrote:

(snip) They did not occur at return points
for the military, but at schools when the
Vets would enroll and attend, and
sometimes in other groups when some
one identified a member of the military in
the immediate area. (snip)
Sorry, I don't buy that either.
snip
I've been a veteran for 30 years

And your experience is all you know. I Understand!
That is my perspective as well!

Throughout all that, we've
never met a veteran yet who has said he or she personally was spit on or
attacked. Instead, these claims most often come from those who were not
directly involved with the military at the time, and almost always involve
a
third party ("I knew a guy who said..."). This is the stuff myths, not
facts, are made of.

I suppose we have never met, at least in person.
I was in the reserves, working in military related work, and witnessed the
events personally.
BTW: Myth = one definition, an old story where the origin is not known....
like the Bible! (No author credited)


(snip) I saw myself, watched repeated
and got involved in breaking up a few
of the attacks! The worst one was when
a gang of about fifty demonstrators tried
to prevent an ex Marine from going to class
because the demonstration was "shutting
down" the school.. It was only heated
discussion, until some jackass decided
that since the Jar-Head wouldn't do what
they told him they would restrain him. He
was gentle, no fatalities, fifteen taken for
medical attention. NEVER JUMP a
mud Marine! The crowd scattered when
he started breaking bones. (snip)

When and where was this? A violent incident like that (fifteen injured,
broken bones, and so on) should easily be verifiable through newspaper
accounts of the time.

There have been auto accidents in California with over a hundred cars
involved, you heard how many were hurt and the outcome of these accidents of
course!
I don't know where you would see it, the school handled it in their clinic
and I didn't see any press or TV about it locally. I do not know why
because I would have thought it was big news!
A broken wrist two broken collar bones, and lots of bruises and a couple of
black eyes didn't seem so big. There were more hurt in a fight after the end
of season football game!
However the Demonstration got almost a whole page! But why would you
believe the news papers, with known bias, and not an eye witness? Not to
good on jury duty to ignore direct testimony. But there is no trial. And I
decline to testify further.

My brother told me that while he was flying
home (civilian air lines) he encountered
people who spit on him. (snip)

Really? Which civilian airlines flew into the Vietnam war zone? Which
airlines allowed passengers to spit on other passengers?

See above.... I think it was Delta from SFO to PHX!

Never jump to conclusions without all
the facts. There may be nothing there
to land on. The theory that China would
have joined the war was never a factor,
except in the eyes of the peaceniks since
the Chinese WERE FINANCING the
war!!! (snip)

The possibility of China opening joining the conflict was a major factor
in decision making of the time. China was obviously supporting the North
Vietnamese, but that is vastly different from what I said ("an escalation
of
the conflict would have caused China to *openly join* the conflict"). An
open conflict with China would have led to several million Chinese
soldiers
flooding into Vietnam to fight our soldiers directly, and may have even
led
to nuclear warfare between China and the USA. Only a darn fool would have
ignored that possibility (yet some military leaders did actually want to
ignore the possibility - our civilian government was wise enough not to).

Thank you for clarifying what you meant to say, I didn't understand the
point as more than what was originally stated.
Well they didn't ignore it, did they?

BUT civilian politicos are not Generals,
lacking the training and skills required
in warfare, and often have wrong
headed motivations. (snip)

BUT interference by non military
government personal was a major factor
in the length of the conflict and the level
of losses we sustained.

And Generals lack the knowledge and skills to judge the wider political
implications of a conflict. They also don't have a mandate from the people
of this country, a Constitutional mandate, to make decisions that could
impact all Americans. The elected President is Commander in Chief of the
military and I expect that Commander to command and the soldiers
(including
Generals) to obey. Anyone who has a problem with that should consider
relocating to a country controlled by a military - this country and it's
military is controlled by an elected civilian government.

You state the obvious as if you have a problem believing it.
Why if Generals lack this magically unique knowledge
are they sometimes elected to the office of President?
Like for example, Washington, Grant, Eisenhower, etc!
I respect your opinion, though I do not agree with much of it.
Why do you believe you have the right to suggest that
a citizen of this country should leave because they disagree with you?
(Rhetorical, I AM dropping this group.)