Missing from Ken Burns’ ‘Vietnam’: The patriotism and pride of those who fought

NY Post ^ | 19 September 2017 | Bing West

[oh8eleven]

Most of the interviewees talk in the lugubrious tones of the defeated. We all know the story ends badly. But when it’s over, we aren’t told why we lost. The music is more memorable than the pictures, and the pictures are more compelling than the narration. We are deluged by sights and sounds but not enlightened as to cause and effect.

The film casts the antiwar movement in a moderately favorable light. Are the protesters the real heroes here? What about the valiant US soldiers, 75 percent of whom were volunteers?

[PROCON]

Well stated, Brother, thanks!

[beelzepug]

I seem to recall Brown & Root being in-country . I don’t know if that was Lady Bird Johnson’s outfit or not. I always thought PA&E was a sideline of the CIA, like Air America. I tell you, you couldn’t tell the players without a program over there.

Thanks for your response. That’s what I like about FReepers, someone always has the answer. Enjoy the rest of your day. -Bob

[rlmorel]

Say what you will about Nixon, he had plenty of guts. Sure, I know he made kissy face with China and gave us the EPA and all, but his mining of the harbors and bombing the north with B-52s is an object lesson in how to wield a sword in a modern war.

[HamiltonJay]

I haven’t seen every episode, caught a few, certainly not jingoist, but the interviewees have shown great pride and patriotism in their statements... The general storyline being offered by the documentary is clearly not rah rah... but it is hard to rah rah something where your own government was lying to its people and sending young men to die pointlessly.

And by pointlessly, I don’t mean that the desire to stop the spread of communism was pointless, but that the tactics of military policy at the time were often pointless.

[HamiltonJay]

How do you blame Cronkite for pointless disasters like Hill 875? Or the countless nameless conflicts over the exact same pieces of land that killed so many? Mainly because once defeated the land was just left for the enemy to return?

I agree with you that many things were handled poorly, and I do agree the US Press was disingenuous, and that Congress was cowardly. I agree the war was winnable, and worth fighting, but I also without question believe our forces were betrayed from the outset by politicians and their leaders.

[yetidog]

I’m a VN vet (USAF) and my reaction to the series is similar. I saw an interview with Burns the other day and he spent considerable time praising American soldiers and the circumstances in which they found themselves. As a retired college teacher of American History, I am glad to see a resurgence of interest in the war as it has been sorely neglected in college history classrooms for several decades now.

[vetvetdoug]

I was part of the monitoring team that inspected the rail cars when it was shipped there in August 1974. The Veterinary service was in charge of NBC monitoring. They burned much of it in an incinerator ship twelve miles South of Gulfport.

[HamiltonJay]

I don’t think any sane person questions for one minute the bravery, or determination of the American soldier in Vietnam, but no one, not even the soldiers themselves can argue that much of that life spent did not need to be, had better policy and leadership existed in DC.

Yes, we killed more of the enemy than they killed of us, but how much of that life lost that was ours was preventable? That’s not an irrational or unfair question, and it is not remotely a question that questions the determination or sacrifice of the American Soldier.

I don’t argue with anything you claim was bought, but the belief that that could have been bought without less loss of life, is not an irrational one.

[HamiltonJay]

I agree, I haven’t seen ANYTHING that comes across as unpatriotic... or anti the soldier.. in any way shape or form, if I did, I would turn it off.

Yes, its not a rah rah interpretation, but its hard to even begin to offer that view when it comes to this war, and the many many many mistakes, mostly avoidable that cost so many lives.

However I have seen nothing that comes across as contempt or disrespect for the soldiers involved in the conflict.....

Yes, there is whitewashing of the protestors , and as of yet, no mention of known elements that incited and used them for their own gains... And I really doubt it will.. but that really a different story than the war itself... IMHO.

[Doche2X2]

I agree. Both Kennedy and Johnson were worried about getting re-elected. But Cronkite, “the most trusted man in America”, went on tv after the Tet Offensive, a major victory, and claimed it was a major defeat. That had a lot of influence. Vietnam is too complicated to blame any one person. But, if we had bombed the hell out of Hanoi early, and mined their harbors,it may have made a difference.

[musicman]

Less Than $431 To Go!!
Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
This Quarter

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[Chainmail]

You guys miss the obvious: our primary mission to be in Vietnam at all was the protection of the South Vietnamese people. Killing the enemy was the primary way of doing that and they made it more difficult because the enemy routinely stayed with and among the civilians.

Yes, you can go right and kill everything in sight and "let God sort them out" but that wouldn't have been us and who we are.

We knew while were there that they war was going to be long and difficult and that options like invading North Vietnam would have been really effective but everyone also knew that the Chinese would have entered the war toute suite if we had.

I knew even as a 20 year old and all of us knew that it had to be a long, steady haul to protect the farmers and merchants and fishermen of Vietnam and that many of us would be killed or maimed. We saw it every day, yet it was so much better than the hot air we had been putting out before about "how much we stood by our allies" when we had backed down before (look up the Hungarian Revolution, 1956).

We fought the Hill Battles and Khe Sanh and Hamburger Hill and in the A Shau to intercept and defeat the North Vietnamese regulars before they could get in among the locals. It was never about territory. We even had squads of Marines (and navy corpsmen) living permanently - or at least, until they were killed or wounded - in the Vietnamese villages to protect them and to teach them how to defend themselves. I lost my best friend in CAP 4 Alpha when it was overrun in June 1967.

The Ken Burns documentary keeps pushing the "futility" of our war just as the pro-enemy Left did back then. It wasn't futile to the people we were protecting and for those ten long years they were able to farm their own land and sell their own produce and raise their kids.

They knew why we were there. So did we.

[bigdaddy45]

How about not drafting young American men and sending them to fight and die on the other side of the world in a country that was no direct threat to the US?

[Swede Girl]

Ditto.

[Terry Mross]

I haven’t watched all of Burns’ crap. But apparently he couldn’t find one Vietnam vet who is proud of his service. Every one of them regret having served and every one is a drama queen. And I believe great exaggerators. Actually, I’m not sure some of them aren’t actors.