Not everyone who served in Nam was a "baby-killer."
But Bombin' Johnnie was.
He conducted indiscriminate bombing raids on civilian population centers and infrastructure 23 times.
He got shot down on the 23 mission.
His A-4 crashed into a lake near Hanoi.
He was rescued from the wreck and from drowning by the very people he had been trying to kill.
For years he's lied about being tortured in captivity. His injuries were incurred in the plane crash and the rescue, for which there apparently wasn't much extra time for gentleness.
He was operated on to treat the injuries, without anaesthesia. But there wasn't much anaesthesia in Hanoi in 1967. They used most of it on the victims of Bombin' Johnnie and his buddies.
On the other hand, they could--and arguably should--have let him die.
Later, he collaborated with the North Vietnamese propaganda machine. Probably, he betrayed his shipmates by enumerating the ship off which he flew, his squadron, their capabilities, and their casualties. All that is documented.
Bombin' Johnnie's not a hero, folks. There was nothing remotely "honorable" or "heroic" about anything ANY American soldier, sailor, marine or airman did in Nam.
The Meaning of "Woke"
9 months ago
11 comments:
I'm trying to look at it pragmatically, Woody. For one thing, whether the First Amendment prohibition against establishment of religion proscribes any cooperation, financial or otherwise, between the federal government and religious organizations is open to debate.
Personally, I'm for a mile-high wall between the two, but that's not the dominant thought these days.
So Obama's Council proposal seems at least a walk back from the Bush's faith-based initiatives fraud. It centralizes training of those who will train community activists right there in the West Wing, which could bring a lot more quality and equality to the way programs across the country are run.
At my most Pollyanna-ish, I can even see the plan as a kind of Trojan horse that plants the values and methods of grassroots community action inside existing institutions at the same time that it promotes the possibility of new social service bases of power.
Bottom line is that Obama is right: our government is so financially screwed that it can't fund and manage anti-poverty programs on its own. If policy can be designed to protect civil rights, oversee programs effectiveness and protect against funding abuses, then it may well be Obama's proposals can jump start long neglected responses to ignorance and poverty.
Yes, I know. You hope I'm right but are pretty sure I'm wrong. Me, too.
SP
trifecta works for a faith-based org, and manages to do a lot of good anyway, without imposing religion on the recipients. ql's daughter worked with some AIDs orgs in Africa, and managed to avoid the idiocy of the admin's abstinence only agenda.
Just sayin'
However, SP missed and those comments both belong above.
McSame is just plain unsound, and I expect to see him go bonkers during a debate with Obama.
Good post...
SEO Services India
Generally I do not post on sites, but I would like to say that this article really forced me to do so! Thanks, really nice article.
SEO Services
Good post….thanks for sharing.. very useful for me i will bookmark this for my future needed. thanks for a great source.
nice posting..........its always great reading such posts, this post is good in regards of both knowledge as well as information.
This is a nice posting.nice information
Interesting Information
Hello!Nice information .Thanks for sharing
Very nice website
Post a Comment