The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Full ArchivesKevin Barrett Podcasts
Eric Margolis on Trump & Military Service—and More
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks


In his new article “Is This the Man with his Finger on the Button?” award-winning journalist Eric Margolis offers a nuanced yet devastating assessment of Trump’s alleged remarks calling fallen soldiers “losers” and “suckers”:

“Our commander-in-chief Trump reportedly dodged the Vietnam era draft six times, at least once because of a little bone spur in one of his dainty feet that were more used to the floors of New York discos than far-flung battlefields…I enlisted in the wartime US Army to go fight in Vietnam. I didn’t have to. I had been accepted to do advanced degrees at Britain’s Oxford University and London’s War College. Instead, I chose to sign my life away to the Army. During the rigors of basic training, I broke a small bone in my left foot, described by medics as a ‘march injury’ from too much stress on the foot. It was very painful and forced me to hobble and limp while drill sergeants roared abuse at me. Somehow, I graduated from basic and advanced infantry training and still managed dawn bayonet practice against straw-stuffed dummies while yelling, ‘Kill the Kong! Kill the Kong!’”

Why did Eric Margolis volunteer to fight in Vietnam? What changed his view of that war? Under what conditions is war justified? Are all wars—or at least all recent US wars—based on lies? (And if so, did Trump have a point?!) Was the US military hijacked on 9/11 by neocons and flown on a suicide mission against the Middle East on behalf of Israel? Did the same US military biowar complex that manufactured The 2001 Anthrax Deception also engineer the COVID-19 pandemic? These are some of the questions raised in this unusually frank interview with one of our leading mainstream world affairs journalists.

Eric S. Margolis is an award-winning, internationally syndicated columnist. His articles have appeared in the New York Times, the International Herald Tribune the Los Angeles Times, Times of London, the Gulf Times, the Khaleej Times, Nation – Pakistan, Hurriyet, – Turkey, Sun Times Malaysia and other news sites in Asia.

(Republished from Truth Jihad by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: History, Ideology • Tags: 9/11, American Military, Neocons, Vietnam War 
Hide 27 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anonymous[408] • Disclaimer says:

    I knew Vietnam was bad but I had no idea we were fighting King Kong There.

    • LOL: Daemon
  2. “Are all wars…based on lies?”
    History shows all conflicts are primarily motivated by power and interests. Yet all sides deny this.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

  3. Sir What about the skaves who died building the Romen Empire-? I feel you are a very mived up man who never read History as it should be read. What about the money backing these Antifa PpL?

  4. A123 says:

    The problem with Margolis is that he did not make an issue of :

    — Biden’s military service = NONE
    — Obama’s military service = NONE

    #NeverTrump Margolis decided who to hate, and then farmed for ways to frame that intolerance for maximum effect. “Bone spurs” may score well as a rhetorical flourish, but it also shows that Margolis is sadly lacking (or actively avoiding) policy substance.

    For example, Trump achieving Peace Deals and Avoiding Wars.

    PEACE 😇

  5. @Revert Shia former US Navy

    Please do not get me wrong I respect you for going to war. I am also a Vietnam Veteran and It hurts me to say this but at the time of the war in Vietnam, my Generation was anti [USG] Woodstock LOVE, PEACE, AND ROCK & ROLL-! Remember Kent State-?
    trump is right we were all suckers for what we know today about all these wars

    • Replies: @Christo
  6. @A123

    No trump the coward Draft Dodger only arms Dictators and Evil Regimes like ISISraHELL/ The Saudi Crime Family The UAE/Bahrain The Creators of ISIS Along with the help of the CIA/MOSSAD

    • LOL: 36 ulster
  7. As I have commented previously, Margolis and others who constantly equate Trump deferrals to draft dodging, are claiming that a physician(s) has committed fraud in a medical report. At the time, the only way to identify a bone spur was by X-Ray, which would have been read by a physician specializing in Radiology issuing a written report, with a copy sent to the referring physician. The referring physician would be required to provide a report describing why the bone spur prevented Trump from meeting the military criteria for medical fitness. At any time, the military could have requested a copy of the X-Ray, and required Trump to submit to their medical examination. If Margolis and others have proof of fraud, then submit it, otherwise STF up.

    • Agree: Leander Starr
    • Replies: @dimples
    , @Harold Smith
  8. Ko says:

    Margolis is a self-anointed tool for the irrelevant leftist basket of hacks who pretend their thoughts have meaning. The list of rags that published him speaks for his lack of gravitas. The New York Times? Please. I wouldn’t debase an untrained puppy by lining its sleeping pod with that nest of lies. Yet, somehow it fits for Margolis, TDS and all.

    • Agree: anonymous1963
  9. One of the comments that I saw being attributed to Trump was a statement the effect of ‘Why were we even involved in this in the first place’, which is a very lucid and accurate observation as relates to WW1.

    I watched ‘”They shall not Grow Old”, and what was most immediately interesting to me was not the footage, it was the audio commentary of the, now very elderly, initial Brit enlistees who rushed to sign up after the British enter the war.

    These are comments from aged men, but they still refer to their enthusiasm to go fight people they do not know, who they have no conflict/quarrel of any sort with, and they are referred to in the commentary as the ‘dregs’ of the industrial system of the early 20th century by one commenter in the movie, if I am recalling the term correctly.

    These are men who watched as their command burned through men by the thousands daily, and who kept attacking the German lines and wallowing in their own flooded trenches over the course of years. They have watched as post war Britain became flooded with aliens, and as the ruling class grew ever richer while restricting the speech of the descendants of the men who fought and died in a totally pointless conflict arranged by those leading from the rear.

    WW1 would never have continued if the Generals had to suffer through the trenchfoot and rat infested static lines themselves, which is a good reason to insist that leaders go to the fronts themselves and remain at the spearhead until the conflict is concluded or they are a casualty.

    I suspect that what Trump was likely trying to express was probably that it was a loosing conflict that set up future mass slaughter, compelled draftees like my own grandfather to later die agonizingly enmasse in WW2, and that this enthusiasm for war staffed by what is referred to in They shall not Grow Old as the ‘dregs’ if I am recalling correctly (no protests or outrage that I have noted), was a losing proposition for the nations and draftees (not to mention the enlistees seeking to avoid the infantry by enlisting in the Air Force or Navy before they could be drafted…)

    It was much harder to get AF and Naval slots through most of WW2, largely due to memories of the flooded, rat infested trench accounts from infantry in WW1.

    There is almost certainly a element of sensitivity in Trump to his own lack of service, and most of us attempt to make up for that in some way, often ill-advised, but honestly this is a short-coming in all of us, and singling out Trump makes no sense to me.

    What Trump is accountable for is –

    bringing Jared into the Oval Office when he shares not a single priority with the base who elected him. As a million americans file unemployment a week, and Trump is allegedly seeking reelection, Trump’s administration is focused on the UAE, a nation few Americans could find on a map, which is populated mostly by alien contract workers and which is a complete dictatorship.

    Instead of the campaign promises of ending work Visa abuses, and massive immigration, his admin was almost immediately pushing for ‘dreamer’ amnesty due to Jareds spouse, and backed down only after a total rebellion of the base voter who elected him – not assisted the Republican media assets in most cases.

    if Trump is re-elected, there is a dreamer amnesty for millions coming right after the election, as everyone who voted him into office in the first place has heard him advocate for since first elected, and staffed up with Jared and Ivanka. There was never a birthright citizenship executive order as promised. There was no HC plan to cover all americans as was promised, and is the norm in every first world nation but the US. There was a $1200 joke of assistance to americans to get them through nine months, as they spent down all their assets, while their was a still escalating bailout of Trillions for now completely faked speculative markets.

    There were more than 600k work permits for all illegal entrants of working age who illegally jumped the US border and were rewarded with the exact permit that drew them to make to crossing by Trumps’ admin. The 2020 RNC was a horrific pander-olympics carefully designed to meet the specs of the lobbyist / Chamber of Commerce funders of the party that is now on its last leg.
    Citizenship was traded for votes live on air, to 3rd world natives in their tribal garb to the glee of the outsourcing and insourcing companies who dictate how many permits they will require.

    Trump waited, likely at the advise of you know who, till 3 months before his re-election attempt to even marginally limit the insourcing work permits for masses of aliens replacing american workers, (promised during the campaign) after being warned “Tim Cook wont like this”.

    Trump hired masses of lobbyists and people who actively opposed his election, to staff his admin. They warmed up only once his actions catered to the Republican cheap labor system that has now destroyed their future viability and sent them in search of a new base. The focus of the Admin is foreign policy deals involving nations americans can not find on a map and dont care about during an unprecedented health, social and financial crisis.

    Trump has the LUXURY of running against a slate that has NO BASE at all.. All of the Biden and Harris voters are simply voting AGAINST Trump – there is no real interest in who his opponent even is, which is a huge advantage that almost no other candidate has ever had.

    Trumps’ observation that war is a losing proposition was a accurate assessment, although I think it may have been mis-stated or even mis-interpreted,
    however his folly was attaching himself to the Republican cheap labor system and wannabe lackies and beneficiaries of that cheap labor scam system, which is structured to literally wipe out the lives and financials of its own base voters for a short term payoff, that has now arrived to its terminus.

    There is no ‘win’ with the GOP that put on the 2020 RNC. Any victory for them would simply confirm the viability of their treason against the american worker and citizen, so the focus should be on vehicle that can serve american citizens, which the GOP cannot.

  10. Bolo says:
    @A123

    Understand Biden had 5 deferments for military service due to asthma…
    Never seen anything indication of him having issues related to it….

    • Replies: @Lee
  11. I am going to give my typical response here.

    Your service was not a waste. Your efforts in Vietnam were not a waste. And in no manner should anyone who fought on behalf of S. Vietnamese independence be ashamed, embarrassed or guilt ridden by the experience. War is nasty business from what I have read and listened to —

    Congratulations on hard won fight and I regardless how or what yo think or feel appreciate and honor your service to the United States.

    Every conflict people — men find reasons to avoid it. That is to their conscience. As for you

    well done — would that the US honor the same.

    —————————-

    It is strange that the supposed opponents of Vietnam defense should be advocating for the useless, needless and devastating conflicts all across the globe.

    • Agree: 36 ulster
    • Replies: @Timur The Lame
  12. @EliteCommInc.

    Yes, your typical response for sure. Hard ‘won’ fight the standard knee-slapper. The author who was there himself calls it a waste but of course you know better.

    Lets, have some fun and have you explain how Custer was victorious at Little Big Horn, m’kay?

    Cheers-

  13. dimples says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Perhaps the Trump family’s big bucks had something to do with it, it usually does.

    • Replies: @Franz
    , @Curmudgeon
  14. Christo says:
    @Revert Shia former US Navy

    It could be said all the guys who fought in WWII were suckers as well. It was highly contrived to get the USA involved in both sides of the globe about it.

    My dad who fought in Vietnam , and my god-father who died in Vietnam were no different that the fools who joined or were drafted in WWII , suckers or cannon fodder. They will get you either way.

  15. Lee says:
    @Bolo

    That is correct.

    Both Trump and Biden had 5 educational deferments and one health deferment that dropped their draft eligibility down to “national emergency” status.

  16. Franz says:
    @dimples

    Perhaps the Trump family’s big bucks had something to do with it, it usually does.

    Certainly a factor and probably not a small one.

    Little town I come from had a few doctors, GPs in private practice, who later said they could get any healthy man a medical deferment for about $1500. More in current rates, of course, but that was not small change for 18-year-olds in the 1960s.

    They can always find something. One guy had a few dead veins in his leg. Another really was a bed-wetter. These things get you a medical out.

    Even if you get in, you can get out on a mental. One guy in boot camp with me was incapable of staying clean. He stunk up the barracks so bad they finally had to let him go “for the good of the service” and it took him less than three weeks.

    The trouble actually lies with those of us who were young and dumb and volunteered. Kids should be forced to be more cynical. But there’s always that tug of patriotism, idealism, and just plain stupidity. To know at forty what you need at 14… ah, if only.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  17. @dimples

    Perhaps is not proof, it is speculation. If you, Margolis and others have proof, bring it, the public deserves to know. Otherwise STFU.

  18. @Franz

    Certainly a factor and probably not a small one.

    Pure conjecture. If there is proof, it should be produced. Otherwise STFU.

    a few doctors, GPs in private practice, who later said they could get any healthy man a medical deferment for about $1500.

    Then why the hell would nobody report them to their licensing body? Who would want a fraud for a doctor? If you can’t trust one to fill out a medical, why would you trust him/her for your own diagnosis.

    • Replies: @Franz
  19. @Curmudgeon

    “If Margolis and others have proof of fraud, then submit it, otherwise STF up.”

    Well your evil orange messiah doesn’t need any “proof” when he accuses someone of something, so why does anyone else need “proof” when they accuse him of something? For example, where is the “proof” that Assad “gassed his own people”? Apparently there never was any such “proof” yet that didn’t stop your evil orange messiah from mass-murdering 14 or 15 Syrians and risking WW3 when he attacked the Shayrat airbase with cruise missiles.

    https://www.newsweek.com/now-mattis-admits-there-was-no-evidence-assad-using-poison-gas-his-people-801542

    • Troll: GeneralRipper
  20. “Lets, have some fun and have you explain how Custer was victorious at Little Big Horn, m’kay?”

    Hmmmmmm . . .

    I understand it, The Battle of the Little Big Horn was fought on the North American Continent. And in that conflict General Custer’s command was roundly destroyed to man.

    Nothing about that battle is in any way similar to the South Vietnamese to maintain the country established after the French ended their occupation. The North Vietnamese essentially had one serious offensive effort, The TET Offensive, which was effectively beaten back.

    It’s a very peculiar comparison inadequate n so many levels, one wonders why you even bothered. It makes no sense.

    • Replies: @Timur The Lame
  21. Franz says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Pure conjecture. If there is proof, it should be produced. Otherwise STFU.

    You really ought to sit down and have a beer with somebody who lived in that era. This sort of thing they actually came right out and said. At Columbia, Cornell, and other universities they were quite frank in saying that being drafted was something that happened to farm boys and factory boys. University swells were the future of America. “Idiot sticks” (what they called the M-16 rifle) was for everyone else.

    It was a class thing. Americans may not want to know about class but to the rest of the world it’s old news. Dick Cheney said he had “other priorities” so it’s possible to admire his honesty. Rich kids are American aristocracy. The rules don’t apply.

    Then why the hell would nobody report them to their licensing body?

    Because doctors were doctors then, not agents of the DEA. There was no DEA. Medical boards were strictly there to see that minimum standards were set. They did not violate doctor-patient confidentiality.

    News of what doctors did off-record was easy to find because there were grey areas that the law might have frowned on but often looked the other way about. When abortion was illegal, finding a sympathetic MD for a “procedure” was not especially difficult. Also getting medical papers for not getting drafted took no genius either.

    What went on with doctors was none of the laws business. Now it’s everybody’s business. From the “McMedicine” medical groups, insurance companies, and dozens of Federal agencies passing thousands of laws a week — all contributing to giving the Unites States the worst medical system in history.

    Everything’s against the law now but it wasn’t always thus. People who say “this was a free country once” are not wrong.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  22. @EliteCommInc.

    I guess you are not big on detecting sarcasm. I recall having a back and forth with you about the Vietnam war and the ‘hard fought victory’ comment reminded me of your obstinacy on who won the war. If you are still of the opinion that the USA won the Vietnam war well, I imagine that nobody will be able to convince you otherwise.

    Here is a thought that you may half way accept, the US may have won by military metrics but they lost by political metrics. ‘Lost’ is the operative word. They left the field of battle. There was no declaration of victory. Their highest negotiating objective was ‘peace with honour’.

    Your stance would only get traction at VFW functions over many beers with unintelligent good ‘ole boys. So be it. Contrarian positions are good for lively debates as long as they don’t become delusions.

    Fun fact: many years ago I would have agreed with you however since then I have read dozens of books on the war, the diplomacy involved and even full transcripts of the White House tapes. So I say to you in a ‘Yoda’ way, ” the wise man understands the fool for he was once foolish, but the fool doesn’t understand the wise man for he was never wise”.

    Cheers-

  23. “Lost’ is the operative word. They left the field of battle. There was no declaration of victory. Their highest negotiating objective was ‘peace with honour’.”

    Uhhh yah interesting. Hmmmm . . . ok.

    Great you have read books. Nothing wrong with reading.

    No. The US did not lose the conflict. We weren’t there. The old and tired and true political loss is just as nonsensical and the military loss humdrum.

    Both the Russia and China admit that the US had no intention of leaving Vietnam. Detente’ with Russia and Pres. Nixon’s face to to face with Chinese ended the matter. Both of those are major political victories.

    China and Russia both made it clear to Vietnam that the effort was not going to succeed. I am sure North Korea would have hung in there, but since North Korea was dependent on China and Russia, even they had to concede.

    Sure the demands back ho,me made the matter more pressing. And sure the North Vietnamese which is no big shock, violated the agreement as they had violated every agreement ever made regarding peace and peaceful negotiations. But the US cannot be responsible for the lack of integrity of of other parties.

    The defeats sadly were those of the S. Vietnamese. I would grant a loss if the US had been present enforce to guarantee the treaty. But clearly the politics was hinged on the military defence and we simply weren’t there. A lot has been made of this so called political victory and there was a time when I would grant that some room. But at the end of the and now as Vietnam is doing

    “We want to sell KFC too,” dance forget it. Communism in all of its goals and manifestations have failed. When your enemies start asking you for trade deals to embrace open markets against everything they murdered. lied and ravaged their country for — its a safe bet that their agenda is a failure. So no

    if anything what has occurred are the predictions of western assessments regarding communist policy — it is destructive outwardly and inwardly. I am not sure what you have been reading, but clearly nothing about just how fractured Vietnam was and remains since that period.

    A political victory — not in the real world of politics. Only in the world of the same protesters who demanded that the US give peace a chance — when in fact, it was only the North engaged in war with the aide of China, Russia, and North Vietnam.

    The US has lost three wars

    The War of 1812

    The second Gulf War in Iraq

    and Afghanistan.

    You know the truth and accuracy of the Vietnam episode is not dependent on the one’s political persuasion — what matters are the events and consequences and for more than forty years the left and a host of weal kneed republicans have folded to press of political correctness as they repeatedly fall for the images of Saigon as reflecting a US loss — it’s embarrassing to remind that it was the embassy and every country that had an embassy in S. Vietnam left as the communist rolled in. Our allies lost and I would agree that we should have maintained support

    The political impact on the US was nil to the political mission of confronting communists. The loss of face if any was what happened here at home, the level of ignorance among those opposed to the the right of S. Vietnam to determine her own course. Political defeat — good grief.

    Have you noticed how the Vietnam protesters have fallen all over themselves to support utterly needless interventions — Learned all the wrong lessons applied at the wrong time history.

    Let’s just keep this our secret — we exited Vietnam after a signed peace agreement. At the end of the day — all agreements are dependent on the veracity and integrity of the parties involved and here — politically if one wants to hang their hat —- they lost — having demonstrated themselves as untrustworthy partners — nothing knew there.

    No the US did not lose politically nor militarily.

  24. Ironies of Ironies . . .

    Vietnam now wants US support to protect them from China. . . .

    I rarely have a sense of humor, am lousy at joke telling/getting and writing . . . .

    but anyone who understands the meaning of the previous TPP . . . would find the matter a shade humorous.

  25. I told my self that I wouldn’t engage you on the Vietnam won/lost issue because you have a mental block (which some people call a head) on this point, but I am a weak man hence a response.

    I really can’t go on unless I ask you to read the book on the Watergate tapes transcripts. I am not going to fetch it and give you the particulars because I know that you will not seek it out let alone read it. It is 800+ pages of very small print. But if you did, you would find that Dick Nixon, Hank Kissinger and to a lesser degree Al Haig would disagree with almost every point you made from the Detente, to visiting China and the Soviet Union and most importantly the politics involved. Remember, these were actual private conversations. You might be familiar with the Clausewitz phrase of “war is politics by other means”. Of course you would probably find to be him as a fool also. Enough on that for me.

    If you are interested in historical controversies of a martial nature it might be of interest for you to look at Imperial Germany which quit the war without being defeated in the field or maybe Jutland which I think still is up for discussion by Naval buffs.

    But to up the ante by stating that the US won BOTH militarily and politically in the Vietnam conflict means to me that you are flirting with a one way ticket to the puzzle factory.

    Even funnier is that the conflicts you considered lost by the USA are less clear cut by any metric
    than the Vietnam one. And I figured you for a Johnny Horton fan. Go figure.

    Cheers-

  26. @Franz

    I am from that era, and so was my cousin, whose number came up and decided to choose voluntarily his service branch instead of being assigned to be part of the meat grinder.
    I am well aware of all of the talk about the farm boys etc. It was no secret that most in university would be given a free pass. Whether those deferrals were actually obtained by fraud is a different question. It comes back to the same point for all of them: if there is proof, bring it.

    Why is Trump’s deferral an issue when Biden didn’t serve either, and like Trump, was at university? Obama didn’t serve. I’ve seem stupid memes about 5 generations of Trumps, 2 world wars and no service. Is it Trump’s fault his father was 10 years old and his grandfather 40+ when WWI started? Is it Trumps fault his grandfather was dead and his father would have been too old for WWII? Do you really think somebody in his late teens or early 20s knows which doctor to go to to get a fraudulent deferral? Don’t you think someone in the military might become suspicious if Dr. X has a high rate of medical deferrals?
    It would be helpful for people to stop nitpicking at the minutia. Trump has flaws, we all do. Focus on the stuff that matters, not conjecture over something minor. What next? How many speeding tickets he’s had?

  27. “I really can’t go on unless I ask you to read the book on the Watergate tapes transcripts. I am not going to fetch it and give you the particulars because I know that you will not seek it out let alone read it. It is 800+ pages of very small print. But if you did, you would find that Dick Nixon, Hank Kissinger and to a lesser degree Al Haig would disagree with almost every point you made from the Detente, to visiting China and the Soviet Union and most importantly the politics involved. ”

    Ahh, shock,

    the admin didn’t think that the S. Vietnamese could withstand an invasion. And given circumstances at home felt they had to make — I am shocked , shocked at these revelations —

    Old news and your assumptions about what I have and have not read on the matter based on our disagreement isn’t new either. It never fails that whenever some decrying the woes of Vietnam, will declare . . .

    “Aha, but you have to read, this or that . . . book, and what about the transcripts and what about how the admin. ignored the S. Vietnamese admonitions that the North would violate the deal and were abject liars . . .”

    Laugh and laugh. You people never quit. None of this is new and none of it is regulatory. The S. Vietnamese repelled the North three times, one with our help and twice on their own. But, Pres. Nixon was not in office in 1975 when the North with the aid of China, the Soviet Union and North Korea, finally broke through. And the failure or lack of will in the US to return for another round, weak kneed Pres Ford, is not an indication of a US loss. But the simple realities of politics at home.

    If the US had lost the fight and been beaten to to a retreat, that would be one thing. But the reality is that Ho Chi Mien’s prophecy came true — if the US gets in the fight they won’t leave. Here’s a leader who by his own reckoning knew up front the effort was a loser —-

    And that is where your argument is simply silly, because Ho Chi Mien, only continued to fight because he was over ruled by the militant faction —

    We know about the politics because after forty years of denying access to the internal records inside Vietnam, they opened the door to their archives — and the so called “will” of North Vietnam or the political genius . . . and unity — is upended by their own record. The North Vietnamese did more damage to the whole of Vietnam than another twenty years of conflict could have done. No their violation of the agreement ended with a war with China

    — deep animus with Soviets
    —a loss of financial and military support
    — a nasty foreign relations with their neighbors from their constant violations of their sovereignty
    (lack of control of their military)
    — a disastrous attempt to spread communism throughout the region — Cambodia
    — a disastrous ten year purge of their intellectual, military and economic leaders
    — economic persistent depressions – not from war but from the purging of their human capital.

    — some political victory

    We lost an ally we did not lose the war on any level. S. Vietnam fell in 1975, we left in 1973. You have an upside down view of what victory means —

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Kevin Barrett Comments via RSS