Warning: Graphic: It's been 50 years since AP photographer Nick Ut captured image of 9-year-old girl running naked from a napalm attack during Vietnam

[whitehall]

Where did you learn that bizarre lie? Or did you make it up yourself? It will not do to reject facts that interfere with what you want to believe.

---------

Napalm and The Dow Chemical Company​

FROM THE COLLECTION: VIETNAM WAR
Share:

The U.S. military's use of napalm in Vietnam triggered widespread student protests, some aimed at the manufacturer, The Dow Chemical Company.

Napalm had been used before, most notably in the incendiary bombs that devastated large swaths of Japanese cities during World War II, including some 60 percent of Tokyo. What distinguished Napalm B, the variant employed in Vietnam, was how easily it could be made. Simple "bathtub chemistry" was used to mix together a concoction of gasoline, benzene, and polystyrene. In 1965 the Pentagon requested bids from the 17 U.S. companies that made polystyrene; one of the winning bids was from a small company based in Midland, Michigan, called Dow Chemical. Dow was only ranked 75th on a 1967 list of military contractors; before getting into the napalm business, it was best known as the maker of Saran Wrap. But Dow soon became the military's sole supplier of napalm, which meant that when its use in the Vietnam War became controversial...

In Vietnam, the first televised war, viewers began to see images of the civilian casualties caused by napalm bombs, and a January 1967 article in Ramparts magazine presented color photographs of mutilated Vietnamese children. The pictures helped Martin Luther King Jr. decide to go public with his opposition to the war.

Napalm and The Dow Chemical Company | American Experience | PBS

It was never a big part of their business, but napalm would rapidly become the Dow Chemical Company's best-known product.

www.pbs.org

Wasn't it South Vietnam that bombed it's own? Was it OK for the A.P. to pretend it was the U.S. in order to convince Americans to end the war? What if they showed disfigured Nagasaki and Hiroshima Japanese citizens who would die of radiation poisoning?

 

[Hector12]

Wasn't it South Vietnam that bombed it's own? Was it OK for the A.P. to pretend it was the U.S. in order to convince Americans to end the war? What if they showed disfigured Nagasaki and Hiroshima Japanese citizens who would die of radiation poisoning?

No it was not. American aviators bombed with napalm.

 

[whitehall]

No it was not. American aviators bombed with napalm.

Look it up. You are wrong.

 

[AZrailwhale]

There was tyranny on both sides. Neither the North Vietnamese government nor the South Vietnamese government was worth fighting for.

I have to agree with you there. I can remember watching Buddhist Monks burning themselves alive to protest the RVN government. But I think the South was marginally better, plus it wasn’t invading the PRVN, it was being invaded.

 

[AZrailwhale]

No it was not. American aviators bombed with napalm.

So did the ARVNs. Napalm was a very common weapon.

 

[Hector12]

So did the ARVNs. Napalm was a very common weapon.

Napalm was an inhuman weapon in an unjust war we could have easily avoided.

 

[Hector12]

I have to agree with you there. I can remember watching Buddhist Monks burning themselves alive to protest the RVN government. But I think the South was marginally better, plus it wasn’t invading the PRVN, it was being invaded.

Fighting to defend the lesser of two evils did not justify the financial and human cost of the War in Vietnam.

 

[Hector12]

Look it up. You are wrong.

I have already posted this. Read it this time.

-----------

The U.S. military's use of napalm in Vietnam triggered widespread student protests, some aimed at the manufacturer, The Dow Chemical Company...

a January 1967 article in Ramparts magazine presented color photographs of mutilated Vietnamese children.

Napalm and The Dow Chemical Company | American Experience | PBS

It was never a big part of their business, but napalm would rapidly become the Dow Chemical Company's best-known product.

www.pbs.org

 

[Mac-7]

Most of the Vietnamese did not want us.

Bullshit

Most south vietnamese waned to live in peace

Something the communists would not allow

 

[Soupnazi630]

Most of the Vietnamese did not want us.

Most off them did not want the communists either.

As I pointed out earlier most just wanted to be left alone by both sides.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Where did you learn that bizarre lie? Or did you make it up yourself? It will not do to reject facts that interfere with what you want to believe.

---------

Napalm and The Dow Chemical Company​

FROM THE COLLECTION: VIETNAM WAR
Share:

The U.S. military's use of napalm in Vietnam triggered widespread student protests, some aimed at the manufacturer, The Dow Chemical Company.

Napalm had been used before, most notably in the incendiary bombs that devastated large swaths of Japanese cities during World War II, including some 60 percent of Tokyo. What distinguished Napalm B, the variant employed in Vietnam, was how easily it could be made. Simple "bathtub chemistry" was used to mix together a concoction of gasoline, benzene, and polystyrene. In 1965 the Pentagon requested bids from the 17 U.S. companies that made polystyrene; one of the winning bids was from a small company based in Midland, Michigan, called Dow Chemical. Dow was only ranked 75th on a 1967 list of military contractors; before getting into the napalm business, it was best known as the maker of Saran Wrap. But Dow soon became the military's sole supplier of napalm, which meant that when its use in the Vietnam War became controversial...

In Vietnam, the first televised war, viewers began to see images of the civilian casualties caused by napalm bombs, and a January 1967 article in Ramparts magazine presented color photographs of mutilated Vietnamese children. The pictures helped Martin Luther King Jr. decide to go public with his opposition to the war.

Napalm and The Dow Chemical Company | American Experience | PBS

It was never a big part of their business, but napalm would rapidly become the Dow Chemical Company's best-known product.

www.pbs.org

I believe he was specifically referring to the photo of the kids which the OP used to start this thread,

It is NOT a bizzarre lie it is fact those kids were hurt by south vietnamese airforce aircraft not by US aircraft.

Did we use Napalm ? Yes and we still do. We did all the way back to WWII. But in that famous photo no US personnel were involved.

 

[Deadstick]

I have to agree with you there. I can remember watching Buddhist Monks burning themselves alive to protest the RVN government. But I think the South was marginally better, plus it wasn’t invading the PRVN, it was being invaded.

I don't know how many times people need telling, the South was liberated to unify the whole Country, that that border on the 17th paralell and the DMZ was suposed to be temporary, once the Stooges in the South and their American handlers sabotaged the deal in Genever Minh had no choice but to go to war and liberate the Country.


Why was Vietnam split into two?


After World War II and the collapse of Vietnam's monarchy, France attempted to re-establish its colonial rule but was ultimately defeated in the First Indo-China War. The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two with a promise of democratic elections in 1956 to reunite the country.

 

[Hector12]

I believe he was specifically referring to the photo of the kids which the OP used to start this thread,

It is NOT a bizzarre lie it is fact those kids were hurt by south vietnamese airforce aircraft not by US aircraft.

Did we use Napalm ? Yes and we still do. We did all the way back to WWII. But in that famous photo no US personnel were involved.

If what you say is true, what significance is it? According to President Eisenhower as many as 80% of the Vietnamese supported the Communists. Vietnam was unimportant to our economy and security. We should have left that country alone. All we had to do to avoid that war was to sign and honor the Geneva Agreement of 1954, which I have excerpted here. It specifically forbade what we did to that country.

 

[Soupnazi630]

I don't know how many times people need telling, the South was liberated to unify the whole Country, that that border on the 17th paralell and the DMZ was suposed to be temporary, once the Stooges in the South and their American handlers sabotaged the deal in Genever Minh had no choice but to go to war and liberate the Country.


Why was Vietnam split into two?


After World War II and the collapse of Vietnam's monarchy, France attempted to re-establish its colonial rule but was ultimately defeated in the First Indo-China War. The Geneva Accords in 1954 partitioned the country temporarily in two with a promise of democratic elections in 1956 to reunite the country.

It was never liberated

It was invaded.

Minh was merely a brutal conquerer and you are repeating false hoos which were his excuses.

 

[Soupnazi630]

If what you say is true, what significance is it? According to President Eisenhower as many as 80% of the Vietnamese supported the Communists. Vietnam was unimportant to our economy and security. We should have left that country alone. All we had to do to avoid that war was to sign and honor the Geneva Agreement of 1954, which I have excerpted here. It specifically forbade what we did to that country.

We did not sign it hence were not bound by it. We did however have a treaty with the south which we honored

Minh was not justified in his actions so we cannot be blamed for his starting the war and carnage which HE is responsible

 

[Hector12]

We did not sign it hence were not bound by it. We did however have a treaty with the south which we honored

Minh was not justified in his actions so we cannot be blamed for his starting the war and carnage which HE is responsible

What matters is that the overwhelming majority of the Vietnamese supported the Communists, Vietnam was unimportant to our economy and security, and we could have avoided an expensive, futile, and unjust war by signing the Geneva Agreement of 1954.

The War in Vietnam was even less justified than the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russia has been invaded through Ukraine. The United States could not have been invaded through Vietnam.

 

[Soupnazi630]

What matters is that the overwhelming majority of the Vietnamese supported the Communists, Vietnam was unimportant to our economy and security, and we could have avoided an expensive, futile, and unjust war by signing the Geneva Agreement of 1954.

The War in Vietnam was even less justified than the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russia has been invaded through Ukraine. The United States could not have been invaded through Vietnam.

Once again no they did not.

the overwhelming majority just wanted to be left alone to frow rice and eat their fish and pigs they did not care about any politics.

We had a treaty witht he south snd honored it.

Minh was the aggressor

 

[Deadstick]

It was never liberated

It was invaded.

Minh was merely a brutal conquerer and you are repeating false hoos which were his excuses.

Can you read or are you being deliberately bloody dumb? i pointed out the facts about the Genveva deal and other posters have done the same and the status of Vietnam at the time, yet you continue with your retarded narrative.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Can you read or are you being deliberately bloody dumb? i pointed out the facts about the Genveva deal and other posters have done the same and the status of Vietnam at the time, yet you continue with your retarded narrative.

wrong

You guys are not posting facts you are posting opinions and in your case out right LIES

Minh was no liberator he was a communist enslasver

CAN YOU READ?

Or is regurgitating propaganda all your piss brain can handle?

I am stating facts BOY deal with it

Your revisionist bullshit is DISPROVEN

 

[Hector12]

Once again no they did not.

the overwhelming majority just wanted to be left alone to frow rice and eat their fish and pigs they did not care about any politics.

We had a treaty witht he south snd honored it.

Minh was the aggressor

We should not have signed a treaty with a South Vietnamese government that lacked popular support.