Ken Burns' "The Vietnam War" (1 Viewer)

Last edited:
If my post and Mike's quote of it look different, it's because I misread the article and accordingly revised the post.

Caputo's book is one I want to read very soon.
 
Just finished watching episode 8, which covered 1969 to May 1970 concluding with the Kent State University shooting. This is the one that gave me pause since I experienced the KSU shootings personally. I was a senior then and would be graduating in December of that same year. After graduation, I lost my student draft deferment and was going to be drafted (my draft lottery number was 75 from the first lottery). By January I was in the USMC going through boot camp at Parris Island. I will have to get my pictures out that I took during the KSU events and revisit them . . . . some are very graphic . . . .

:smile2: Mike
 
Seeing historical events that you experienced is a very odd feeling. It gives you that deja vu transported feeling I mentioned a few days ago.
 
Very interesting article in the Outlook section of the Washington Post this AM, regarding 5 myths of the Vietnam War. The 5 Myths is a regular feature, tackling different subjects every week and this week is Vietnam, spurred by the recent Burns documentary.
The 5 myths addressed are:
1- The Viet Cong was a scrappy guerrilla force.
2-The refugees who came to the U.S. were Vietnam's elite.
3- American soldiers were mostly draftees.
4- Enemy forces breached the U.S. Embassy in the Tet Offensive.
5- South Vietnamese soldiers were unwilling and unable to fight.
Now, I was aware of the facts in the cases of 1, 2, 4 , and 5 but was still relatively unaware of the facts in #3. What follows is directly quoted from the article:
Myth No. 3 - American soldiers were mainly draftees.
Popular culture is rife with examples of poor and minority soldiers arriving in Vietnam via the draft and then dying. The idea runs through the heart of Robert Zemeckis's 'Forrest Gump', Tim O'Brien's 'The Things They Carried', and Michael Cimino's 'The Deer Hunter', among other movies and books. Vietnam was "the most blatant class war since the Civil War", as James Fallows put it in his 1989 book 'More Like Us'.
The facts show otherwise. Between 1964 and 1973, volunteers outnumbered enlisted troops by nearly four to one. Nor did the military rely primarily on disadvantaged citizens or African Americans. According to the 'Report of the President's Commission on an All-Volunteer Armed Force' in February 1970, African Americans "constituted only 12.7 percent of nearly 1.7 million enlisted men serving voluntarily in 1969." A higher proportion of African Americans were drafted in the early years of the war, but were not more likely to die in combat than other soldiers. Seventy-nine percent of troops had at least a high-school education (compared with 63 percent of Korean War veterans and 45 percent of World War 2 veterans). And according to VFW Magazine, 50 percent were from middle-income backgrounds, and 88 percent were white (representing 86 percent of the deaths).
Article written by Lan Cao.
These numbers completely stunned me, having believed for years the tv, newspaper, and even the books that I have read that supported the belief that the war had been fought by the under-class, draftees, and African Americans almost to the exclusion of others, at least in the infantry units, that did so much of the fighting and dying. -- Al
 
I read the article but don't agree with everything she says. On myth number 1, I don't think it was a myth, meaning it was obvious that China and USSR was supporting North Vietnam. Weapons don't appear from nowhere. On myth number 2, again, not a myth; refugees were coming from all walks of life. On myth number 4, they didn't breach the embassy but they got in the compound. On number 5, ARVN weren't as bad as we thought but when they didn't have our support, they couldn't stop the VC and North Vietnam. This one is a mixed bag.

On number three, I believe Vets in the documentary said that around 1969 the soldiers in Vietnam were different than the ones who had been there in the earlier part of the War. The documentary made the point that after that period, there were soldiers who didn't want to be there. Knowing that, before I accept her conclusion, I'd need to see stats of soldiers serving 1964-1969 and those after. It wouldn't surprise me if those in the first period supported her claim but those in the second period didn't. I also take issue with her characterization of the soldiers in The Things They Carried. I think it's a reach.
 
I was an 18 year old volunteer,,Not drafted,,if anything my personal situation was to envy,,great job,,entry level Midwest Stock exchange,,Maybe upper mid class Chicago suburbs,,Family military background went back hundreds of years,,I had a sense of loss at the idea of not serving and breaking the chain,,,I also was impressed by Elvis in GI blues,,Germany with the frauliens,,no way I would have served in a non combat MOS,,my civil war ancestor rode with the 11th Illinois Cavalry,,my father survived 48 Missions ,B17 2nd Bm grp,,my grandfathers a 1st sgt in the German Army Russian front in Big One,,The U S Army at age 42,
Apologies for any harsh words,Reactions I posted as to Burns version of Vietnam and others reaction to it,,the old feelings never die,,the sense of loss of my soldiers is as if it happened this morning,,
2nd Bn,,18th Inf Rgt ,Reconnisance Pltn,,1966-67
 
No apologies needed. Thanks for letting us know how you felt. I think a lot of people have experiences similar to yours.
 
I'm up to episode 9 but one major omission so far is the miscalculation by the US of the relationship between Vietnam and China. The Vietnamese were distrustful and resented Chinese influence in their internal affairs in a similar way to the incursions of any foreign power. There was even a little known conflict between the two following the Vietnam War. It seems extremely unlikely that China would have supported N. Vietnam with combat troops had the US invaded N. Vietnam. The US conceded an enormous advantage to N. Vietnam by respecting international boundaries while the NVA crossed and re-crossed such boundaries as they saw fit and were able to dictate the time and place of almost every battle.
 
BLReed said:
Probably the best critique.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/10/27/oliver-north-pbs-and-ken-burns-get-vietnam-and-richard-nixon-wrong-again.html
Click to expand...

As someone who was living and going to college in DC in the late 60's and served in the Guard in the early 70's I viewed this series with great interest.
I protested against the war after hearing multiple experiences from friends and family who returned from Vietnam. I never blamed or was hostile towards
those who served and it disgusted me how many returning Vets were treated. My trusted friends told me about the atrocities and crimes Americans committed.
They also told me about the drugs and low morale. We can't white wash the war to soothe the feelings of those who served in this unjust and horribly managed war.
Atrocities were committed on both sides and history has confirmed the lies and corruptness of our leaders during this debacle.
The critique, in my opinion, is just not factual or objective.
Burns made mistakes but he tried to show all sides as best he could and I know its hard for some veterans and Americans to admit this was one of our biggest foreign policy mistakes
in the history of our country. We not only lost the war but a good deal of our moral image in the world. For many of us who came to adulthood during this period we learned that our
government was less than perfect and quite frankly the blind trust was over.
We are all entitled to our opinions and respectful debate is always welcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top