Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. 😀

  • Connect, BE BRAVE - We Share Fishing Reports & Outdoor Information Here


            TURKEY CONTEST "Post Your Thoughts" - Leave YOUR mark, make each place you visit "a little better"! Post please......

        HSO Turkey Contest - Sign-up by April 1st. - Click Here.

        EMOJI those posts you 'appreciate, please...IF YOU WANT MORE LIKE IT HERE..'

        Have Fun!!!

Duffman

Vietnam War

Recommended Posts

As with most Ken Burns series, it's been very interesting and entertaining to watch. After seeing the same old footage for the last 40 years, the new stuff is facinating.  '66 kid here, it's amazing to me that this occurred during my lifetime. I hope some of folks put your aversion to PBS aside and enjoy  watching some history.

Maybe even learning a  thing or two about it.

*chuckle*

Edited by Duffman
Trent Reznor score for the win!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this is great to watch for kids born around '66 still in diapers and missed it on TV! ;)

Edited by leech~~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, leech~~ said:

Yes, this is great to watch for kids born around '66 still in diapers and missed it on TV! ;)

If you weren't a kid, why weren't you there in person? Why watch it on TV when you could have signed up for the real thing? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Big Dave2 said:

If you weren't a kid, why weren't you there in person? Why watch it on TV when you could have signed up for the real thing? ;)

Dave, big diff between a baby (Duff) and young teen (leech) to young to fight but not to watch what's going on in the world at the time.  ;)

I know you just started you morning troll!  Good luck fishing! :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, leech~~ said:

Dave, big diff between a baby (Duff) and young teen (leech) to young to fight but not to watch what's going on in the world at the time.  ;)

Not that big of a difference, we were all kids.

17 minutes ago, leech~~ said:

I know you just started you morning troll!  Good luck fishing! :/

Are you mad that my trolling effort hooked one already and yours didn't? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Big Dave2 said:

Not that big of a difference, we were all kids.

Well, I sure as shoot wasn't born.  

And wasn't there a lot of reporting total bologna?  Inflating the numbers of enemy dead and talking about what a great success we were having over there.

The pbs documentary is pretty interesting.  But Ken burns can make anything interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually we weren't all kids..  I graduated High School in 64.    Did my time painting rocks, peeling potatoes, and writing code in California at Fort Ord and Hunter Liggett Military Reservation.   

So far, the show seems a little one sided.   But that could be just me.   It doesn't seem to talk much about the bad deeds of the VC and NVA.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Big Dave2 said:

Not that big of a difference, we were all kids.

 

23 minutes ago, bobbymalone said:

Well, I sure as shoot wasn't born.  

 

18 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

Actually we weren't all kids.. 

When I said "we" I meant Leech, Duff and myself. You guys weren't in the conversation and I just got roasted for including someone in a convo that they didn't choose to be in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

When I said "we" I meant Leech, Duff and myself. You guys weren't in the conversation and I just got roasted for including someone in a convo that they didn't choose to be in. 

OK, whatever..  Maybe a qualifier if it is not the global "we"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

OK, whatever..  Maybe a qualifier if it is not the global "we"

LOL! Literally just a couple days ago you (Delcecchi) and Leech made the rule that someone shouldn't include you in a conversation that you aren't already engaged in and now you (Delcecchi) are butthurt that you (Delcecchi) weren't included in my statement in a thread you (Delcecchi) had yet to be engaged in.

You can't make this stuff up.

Edited by Big Dave2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

Maybe a qualifier if it is not the global "we"

Actually this reminds me of a time many years ago when I worked at the local grocery store. We had a sign in front of the ALL laundry detergent with a special sale price. A lady brought up a bottle of Tide detergent and expected it to be the sale price because the sign said ALL detergent. When I explained to her that it was the specific name brand ALL that was on sale and not the "global ALL" (as Del might put it) she got so embarrassed and angry that as she stormed out of the store she insisted it would have made a difference if we would have underlined the word ALL:D

ALL detergent.jpeg

Edited by Big Dave2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Dave2 said:

LOL! Literally just a couple days ago you (Delcecchi) and Leech made the rule that someone shouldn't include you in a conversation that you aren't already engaged in

No Rule was made Dave, just asked for some decency from others.  Forgot who we were asking though. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Big Dave2 said:

LOL! Literally just a couple days ago you (Delcecchi) and Leech made the rule that someone shouldn't include you in a conversation that you aren't already engaged in and now you (Delcecchi) are butthurt that you (Delcecchi) weren't included in my statement in a thread you (Delcecchi) had yet to be engaged in.

You can't make this stuff up.

Nah, not but hurt at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what i can recall from my school days the teachin lady never really covered the Vietnam war as well as the Korean war in class. Maybe our textbooks were too old but did many of you have much learnin on these wars.  They covered the civil war and world wars but almost skipped over these.  I assume it was because we pretty much got our posteriors handed to us and that doesn't sit well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Blackhawkxp said:

From what i can recall from my school days the teachin lady never really covered the Vietnam war as well as the Korean war in class. Maybe our textbooks were too old but did many of you have much learnin on these wars.  They covered the civil war and world wars but almost skipped over these.  I assume it was because we pretty much got our posteriors handed to us and that doesn't sit well.

Nah, about the time the libbers started taking over education and just ignored anything not on their brainwashing agenda!  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a Great Wars class in HS, teacher spent most of the semester drawing castle defenses on the blackboards that wrapped around three quarters of the classroom.....moats, arrowslits, murder holes, talus, and trou de loup's. 

WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam were covered in the last week of class.  *chuckle*  :)

We even watched Monty Python and The Holy Grail.

"Spank me"

;)

Edited by Duffman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Duffman said:

I had a Great Wars class in HS, teacher spent most of the semester drawing castle defenses on the blackboards that wrapped around three quarters of the classroom.....moats, arrowslits, murder holes, talus, and trou de loup's. 

WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam were covered in the last week of class.  *chuckle*  :)

We even watched Monty Python and The Holy Grail.

"Spank me"

;)

Blackhawkxp Example! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackhawkxp said:

From what i can recall from my school days the teachin lady never really covered the Vietnam war as well as the Korean war in class. Maybe our textbooks were too old but did many of you have much learnin on these wars.  They covered the civil war and world wars but almost skipped over these.  I assume it was because we pretty much got our posteriors handed to us and that doesn't sit well.

I would say that it is pretty typical that Social Studies and History classes in High School are often a decade or two behind.   It takes time for the teacher colleges and textbooks and curricula to get updated and approved and incorporated.    Also giving things a good while to cool down is safer as well.  I don't recall my kids getting taught about Vietnam, and that was a decade or so after it was over.  

I wonder if kids in high school today are getting taught anything about 9/11 and Kuwait and Iraq and war on terror and all that?   And if so, what they are being taught? 

Edited by delcecchi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To this day, even though i had grand parents fight in it, i pretty much have no idea what the Korean war was really about.  All i know is that it was to stop communism from spreading.  

I have the utmost respect for the people that fought for this country and from what i have seen of the Vietnam series I cannot imagine what that hell must have been like for both sides.  I believe a big part of the decay of patriotism in the US lately is due to the fact that a majority of Americans in my age group, including myself (born in '78), have not served in the military .  In the 50's and 60's young men were drafted into the war just like their fathers, uncles, and grandfathers were before them.  I am pretty sure if we would have a  law that made it mandatory to serve at least a year or two in the armed forces the viewpoints would be a lot different concerning the recent protests.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The viewpoints would be a lot "different" but that doesn't necessarily mean it would be "better."  The military must think a volunteer force is better than mandatory enlistment, or it would probably go back to its old way of doing things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After Vietnam, no way would a "peacetime" draft be politically acceptably.  

Korean war started when N. Korea invaded the south.   We, the UN, helped the south after that.   When it looked like the north was about to lose, China sent a few hundred k troops to help out the north.  So we called it all good, have a cease fire (not a truce or whatever) with the DMZ across the middle of the peninsula.   Whacko commie atheist leader still in charge of the north.   Now he has the bomb and soon to have missiles to carry it.  

What will he do?   Continue to starve his people?   Or will the Chinese arrange a regime change? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or did it start when South Korean Dictator Syngman Rhee boasted that he was going to invade North Korea? Rhee was a pretty nasty fellow himself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boasting is not invading.   Typical, never blame the Communists eh Roony? 

Quote

The conflict escalated into open warfare when North Korean forces—supported by the Soviet Union and China—moved into the south on 25 June 1950.[41] On 27 June, the United Nations Security Council authorized the formation and dispatch of UN forces to Korea to repel what was recognized as a North Korean invasion.[42] Twenty-one countries of the United Nations eventually contributed to the UN force, with the United States providing 88% of the UN's military personnel.

Here is the UN Resolution..  BTW the invasion from the North was 10 divisions, 89,000 men.  

Quote

The Security Council,
Recalling the finding of the General Assembly in its resolution 293 (IV) of 21 October 1949 that the Government of the Republic of Korea is a lawfully established government having effective control and jurisdiction over that Part of Korea where the United Nations Temporary Commission on Korea was able to observe and consult and in which the great majority of the people of Korea reside; that this Government is based on elections which were a valid expression of the free will of the electorate of that part of Korea and which were observed by the Temporary Commission, and that this is the only such Government in Korea,

Mindful of the concern expressed by the General Assembly in its resolutions 195 (III) of 12 December 1948 and 293 (IV) of 21 October 1949 about the consequences which might follow unless Member States refrained from acts derogatory to the results sought to be achieved by the United Nations in bringing about the complete independence and unity of Korea; and the concern expressed that the situation described by the United Nations Commission on Korea in its report menaces the safety and well-being of the Republic of Korea and of the people of Korea and might lead to open military conflict there,

Noting with grave concern the armed attack on the Republic of Korea by forces from North Korea,

Determines that this action constitutes a breach of the peace; and

I
Calls for the immediate cessation of hostilities;

Calls upon the authorities in North Korea to withdraw forthwith their armed forces to the 38th parallel;

II
Requests the United Nations Commission on Korea:

(a) To communicate its fully considered recommendations on the situation with the least possible delay;

(b) To observe the withdrawal of North Korean forces to the 38th parallel;

(c) To keep the Security Council informed on the execution of this resolution:

III
Calls upon all Member States to render every assistance to the United Nations in the execution of this resolution and. to refrain from giving assistance to the North Korean authorities.

−text of UN Security Council Resolution 82[16]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now ↓↓↓ or ask your question and then register. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • I’d say it depends on how fast we want results and what the public will tolerate.  I do think a closure during their most vulnerable time is worth serious consideration.  We close the season for other fish for the same reason.  Now we’re realizing the never ending supply of quality panfish does really have an end.   It’s really going to be up to us to understand and accept the facts about how we affect the fisheries.  Getting this information out there and talking with each other is a big help.  I personally know several people who have changed their view on filling the live well or bucket with the most and biggest panfish they can to self imposed limits.  But I also know several people who are still proud as can be to bring home that pile of upper end fish, and worse yet making several repeat trips and bringing others with to do the same.  It’s hard to tell friends what their doing isn’t helpful.   One group of people can substantially fish down smaller lakes in 1-3 years and they’re fine with that.  On to the next lake.  I literally heard that just yesterday.  The limit was dropped on that particular lake to 5 this spring and that has curbed the number of trips they’ve been taking out there.  To me, it doesn’t get to be any clearer than that.   Minky, your practice sounds like what we need to get that 10% group of takers to adopt.
    • Wanderer, any ideas? Would the reduced limit and one over 9 or 10 inches be enough? Should there be a short season closure in the late winter / early spring?  Only catch and release in May and June. I love catching them, eating a few and releasing the rest.
    • here is a new idea to try:  
    • I would have to say that Wanderer is the biggest turkey so he gets my vote. 😀
    • I was out at a local lake last night and found the gills on beds with a few crappies mixed in.  I was learning the lake and planned on keeping moving and targeting bass but couldn’t resist pulling a few pannies in.  As always it was fun but I didn’t keep any and ran into several beds. They were topping out at a solid 8 inches on the board.   As I moved along I could see someone down the line, I thought maybe he was fishing bass also but he didn’t move until I got within about 75 yards.  When I got to the spot he was fishing there was another set of beds but I couldn’t see a fish on them.  Threw my bait in and didn’t get bit.     I’ve been that guy before but I’ve seen that scenario play out too many times to be OK with it anymore.  I know the panfish get hammered all winter and that’s probably putting the biggest hurt on the population but stripping the beds is something we really need to curb IMO.
    • Yes - absolutely thank you to Borch for running this again!   And thanks to everyone who entered!  Having the contest and getting some encouragement helped me get more back in tune to the spring turkey season than I have been lately.  And learn the lesson (again) to not under estimate what’s available and what can happen for anyone.
    • Yes- a cheap go pro knock off. 
    • Congrats Wanderer!  Thanks once again Borch for doing this. 
    • If I could only keep 5 or 10 sunnies this size (around 7 1/2) for the increased chance to catch & release 10+ inch sunnies it would be worth it!
    • Congrats Wanderer!  Shoot Rick a PM to make arrangements for your prize.     Thanks everyone!  It was a challenging but fun season.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.