Should Vietnam War Soldiers Statues Be Removed ?

[Camp]

The bottom line of this issue about hosting and maintaining statues and monuments is the business and prerogative of the people who own the property and pay for the maintenance
The statues and monuments are being removed because they represent negative outcomes politically and economically to the local.communities that hosted or continue to host them. People who want to support hosting these statues and monuments have a right to purchase property and maintain the selected statues and monuments. They do not have the right to force others to host and support them.

 

[JoeB131]

Most Confederates did not fight "so a few rich people could keep owning slaves"

You don't know history.

The degree I have from the University of Illinois says otherwise.

Look, numbnuts, dumb ass Cleetus and Billy-Bob who got to catch bullets might have believed whatever the rich slave rapists told them, but the reality is, the leaders who pushed to secede did so because they wanted to keep slavery.

NO, it does NOT matter to this thread, because the thread is saying that SOLDIERS' statues should stay. What the war was about, has no connection to them. Soldiers don't make policy. They just follow orders, fight wars, risk their lives, and lose their lives, and anyone who tries to remove their statues and dishonor them is an idiot.

Maybe they DESERVE to be dishonored. Here's the thing. After World War II, Germany and Japan made amends for what they did during the war. After Vietnam, a lot of that generation went on to do great things as well.

After the Civil War. Dumb-ass Cleetus and Billy-Bob joined the fucking KKK and imposed Jim Crow. They just continued with their shitty behavior. That's why we need to remove any "honor" for them.

 

[protectionist]

The bottom line of this issue about hosting and maintaining statues and monuments is the business and prerogative of the people who own the property and pay for the maintenance
The statues and monuments are being removed because they represent negative outcomes politically and economically to the local.communities that hosted or continue to host them. People who want to support hosting these statues and monuments have a right to purchase property and maintain the selected statues and monuments. They do not have the right to force others to host and support them.

The people of any government have the right to have whatever statues they see fit to have. In the case of soldiers who risked and, in some cases lost their lives, in war, no subject is more fitting for honor by a public statue.

 

[RealDave]

This question is asked of those who think it’s proper to remove statues of Confederate army soldiers. The confederates fought a defensive war against a foe, that traveled long distances on foot and horseback, to attack the Confederates on their home ground. They fought against a Union army that was shooting at them, blowing up their buildings, and burning down their bridges, churches, etc.

In contrast, the Vietnam War soldiers fought an offensive war, in which they traveled thousands of miles to attack an “enemy” who actually wasn’t an enemy. They shot at and bombed people who had not attacked us, or even threatened us verbally.

It looks like the Confederates, fighting defensively, had a more valid cause to fight than the Vietnam War soldiers fighting offensively – against people who never attacked us.

So if one could call for a Confederate soldier statue to be removed, could they support removal of Vietnam War soldiers’ statues and monuments ? Would they ?

Who knew Vietnam was a part of the United States who chose to try to leave the Union.

 

[protectionist]

Maybe they DESERVE to be dishonored. Here's the thing. After World War II, Germany and Japan made amends for what they did during the war. After Vietnam, a lot of that generation went on to do great things as well.

After the Civil War. Dumb-ass Cleetus and Billy-Bob joined the fucking KKK and imposed Jim Crow. They just continued with their shitty behavior. That's why we need to remove any "honor" for them.

This thread is not about "the leaders who pushed to secede", jock itch. It's about SOLDIERS (and civilians) who fought a DEFENSIVE WAR (and legitimate by that point) against invaders, vs SOLDIERS who fought an OFFENSIVE WAR against innocent people (and illegitimate by that point)

And I've been educating you up to now, most of the southern fighters knew nothing of slavery and never laid eyes in a black person. But continue with your moronic rant if you think you must.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Most alive today believe that Vietnam was a grevious mistake.

1. Most Confederates defended the wrong cause.

2. Most Unionists were not soldiers. They were defending the indivisibility of the Union.

3. As many Unionists in the mountainous regions particularly TN, KY, and MD existed as secessionists. One of every four Texans voted to stay in Union, including Sam Houston.

4. The generals of the South carried out the orders of treason.

5. The revisionist history of the want to be Confederates today continues to be trod underneath our feet in our HSs and colleges.

 

[namvet]

leave it alone

 

[JoeB131]

This thread is not about "the leaders who pushed to secede", jock itch. It's about SOLDIERS (and civilians) who fought a DEFENSIVE WAR (and legitimate by that point) against invaders, vs SOLDIERS who fought an OFFENSIVE WAR against innocent people (and illegitimate by that point)

Except there was nothing legitimate about what the Confederate Traitors did.

You see, the biggest mistake after the Civil War was not to have a tribunal and put Lee, Davis and the rest of the traitors at the end of ropes. That way, they couldn't spread a lot of bullshit about it wasn't about slavery....

 

[JoeB131]

And I've been educating you up to now, most of the southern fighters knew nothing of slavery and never laid eyes in a black person. But continue with your moronic rant if you think you must.

33% of the south was black... Most of them did see blacks, all the time.

Here is what really got Cleetus and Billy-bob out there catching bullets for Dixie. It was the horrifying thought a black man with freedom might marry their daughters.... Dammit, they had worked on centuries of inbreeding, and they weren't going to let that shit happen!

 

[protectionist]

Most alive today believe that Vietnam was a grevious mistake.

1. Most Confederates defended the wrong cause.

2. Most Unionists were not soldiers. They were defending the indivisibility of the Union.

3. As many Unionists in the mountainous regions particularly TN, KY, and MD existed as secessionists. One of every four Texans voted to stay in Union, including Sam Houston.

4. The generals of the South carried out the orders of treason.

5. The revisionist history of the want to be Confederates today continues to be trod underneath our feet in our HSs and colleges.

1. Almost ALL Confederates defended the RIGHT cause >> the defense of themselves, their homes, their churches, their towns, buildings, churches, etc. against invaders from whereever.

2. Who cares ?

3. Ho hum.

4. No more treason than the US Revolutionaries of the US Revolutionary War against England.

5. "Our" high schools and colleges are bastions of liberal lunacy, and to some degree pro-Islamist/Jihadist treason, as well as supporters of Mexican imperialism invading the US and pillaging our economy, jobs, and tax treasuries (more treason). They also teach support for racial discrimination in affirmative action.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

This whole argument to wipe out all of the past that is considered a bad thing to have done or against humanity at the time etc....so...those saying this in California...are you willing to give up your home so native Americans can move back in??

 

[JakeStarkey]

1. No, the secessionists who raised arms raised them against Old Glory and the Union.

2. The great majority of our nation cared then and now. No one cares that the secessionists became soldiers.

3. The Unionists in the Confederate mountain country was honorable patriots not treasonous scum.

4. Our HSs and colleges are bastions of good mainstream Americanism, flicking metaphorically its teeth at confederate lunacy.

5. The US Code outlaws your mismatch of crazy anti-constitutional hatred of civil liberties.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This whole argument to wipe out all of the past that is considered a bad thing to have done or against humanity at the time etc....so...those saying this in California...are you willing to give up your home so native Americans can move back in??

Who is wiping it out? To suggest putting statues in museums to be curated and exhibited is wiping out history is idiocy.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

To me, all memorials should be left alone because they are going to mean something to at least one family.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[WinterBorn]

This question is asked of those who think it’s proper to remove statues of Confederate army soldiers. The confederates fought a defensive war against a foe, that traveled long distances on foot and horseback, to attack the Confederates on their home ground. They fought against a Union army that was shooting at them, blowing up their buildings, and burning down their bridges, churches, etc.

In contrast, the Vietnam War soldiers fought an offensive war, in which they traveled thousands of miles to attack an “enemy” who actually wasn’t an enemy. They shot at and bombed people who had not attacked us, or even threatened us verbally.

It looks like the Confederates, fighting defensively, had a more valid cause to fight than the Vietnam War soldiers fighting offensively – against people who never attacked us.

So if one could call for a Confederate soldier statue to be removed, could they support removal of Vietnam War soldiers’ statues and monuments ? Would they ?

Since Vietnam era soldiers did not steal US Gov't land and property, nor did they take up arms against the US, no the statues should not be removed. But then, you have ignored this simple fact all along. So carry on with your wasted rants.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This question is asked of those who think it’s proper to remove statues of Confederate army soldiers. The confederates fought a defensive war against a foe, that traveled long distances on foot and horseback, to attack the Confederates on their home ground. They fought against a Union army that was shooting at them, blowing up their buildings, and burning down their bridges, churches, etc.

In contrast, the Vietnam War soldiers fought an offensive war, in which they traveled thousands of miles to attack an “enemy” who actually wasn’t an enemy. They shot at and bombed people who had not attacked us, or even threatened us verbally.

It looks like the Confederates, fighting defensively, had a more valid cause to fight than the Vietnam War soldiers fighting offensively – against people who never attacked us.

So if one could call for a Confederate soldier statue to be removed, could they support removal of Vietnam War soldiers’ statues and monuments ? Would they ?

Since Vietnam era soldiers did not steal US Gov't land and property, nor did they take up arms against the US, no the statues should not be removed. But then, you have ignored this simple fact all along. So carry on with your wasted rants.

rockon, WinterBorn

 

[protectionist]

Except there was nothing legitimate about what the Confederate Traitors did.

You see, the biggest mistake after the Civil War was not to have a tribunal and put Lee, Davis and the rest of the traitors at the end of ropes. That way, they couldn't spread a lot of bullshit about it wasn't about slavery....

It WASN'T about slavery for many, if not most, southern fighters. AS I HAVE ALREADY said (lost count how many times now), it was common for southern fighters to know nothing about slavery. They fought only because someone was attacking them and their community, and this was a very legitimate reason

You can refuse to acknowledge this fact, if you wish, and keep yammering about slavery. No problem.

 

[protectionist]

Leave the SOLDIERS' statues alone.

 

[protectionist]

33% of the south was black... Most of them did see blacks, all the time.

Here is what really got Cleetus and Billy-bob out there catching bullets for Dixie. It was the horrifying thought a black man with freedom might marry their daughters.... Dammit, they had worked on centuries of inbreeding, and they weren't going to let that shit happen!

You seem to post a lot of statistical statements. So far not a shred of evidence has been presented by you, backing any of it.

In any case, it doesn't take a history teacher to know that slaves engaged in picking cotton, and that was a coastal plain activity, which the isolated mountain folk knew nothing about, being hundreds of miles away (no TV, Radio, computers, and people were illiterate) Ho hum.

Sounds like you have a bunch of hate for southerners. You might work on that. Be happy I didn't call you a bigot.
You're welcome

 

[protectionist]

Since Vietnam era soldiers did not steal US Gov't land and property, nor did they take up arms against the US, no the statues should not be removed. But then, you have ignored this simple fact all along. So carry on with your wasted rants.

So you're OK with traveling thousands of miles to shoot at, bomb and napalm, people who never attacked us, or even threatened us ? Just wondering.

And what about millions of southern soldiers and civilians who DIDN'T "take up arms against the US", but merely fought in SELF-DEFENSE against people from elsewhere, who were attacking them ?

But then, you (and you puppy dog, Jake Starkey), have ignored this simple fact all along. So carry on with your wasted rants.