Ken Burns' The Vietnam War

[Rjel]

I think Ken Burns might well be the best documentarian today. Watching his Vietnam series has been time well spent, being  enlightening and disturbing at the same time. Some incredible history presented from both sides. It is every bit the equal to his Civil War (and many other series) series of so many years ago. Well worth watching if you have a chance.

[CanadaOne]

Might start watching it tonight.

 

I have the DVD set of his Civil War documentary and it's outstanding.

[No_85_Gramps]

I DVR'd the series and plan on start watching this week. Ken Burns does some outstanding work. Although I missed Vietnam, I was drafted in 1972, my brother, relatives, and other friends all were there, most came home, but not all of them. Fortunately my brother, who was a Marine, made it home.

[ZachariasX]

Just watched it. It's outstanding.

[Retnek]

http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/the-vietnam-war/watch/

 

expect some circumstance if you want to watch it from Europe, f.e.

 

for the background

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4ACye16wfQ

[MiloMorai]

Just watched it. It's outstanding.

Not all thinks so.

 

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/2017/9/13/burning-history-ossifying-the-false-narrative

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/2017/9/18/burning-history-covering-up-original-sins

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/

[Retnek]

Not all thinks so.

 

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/2017/9/13/burning-history-ossifying-the-false-narrative

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/2017/9/18/burning-history-covering-up-original-sins

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/

No surprise, this docu deals with a lot of myth in the USA, dividing the society until today. For the veterans it's especially difficult to accept that all the brutality and suffering was completely useless. Germany needed roughly 50 years to come to a broad consensus, more or less one can fix it to this http://www.dw.com/en/opinion-the-speech-about-history-that-made-history/a-18250339

Hopefully the US will find it's way back to reasonable conditions, where an estimable man might held a speech expressing what Vietnam has been and what is needed to overcome the collective trauma.

[ZachariasX]

Not all thinks so.

 

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/2017/9/13/burning-history-ossifying-the-false-narrative

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/2017/9/18/burning-history-covering-up-original-sins

https://www.peakingat70.com/lets-talk-america/

It is a sensitive topic, especially in the states. Where to begin is always something to debated, but if you have some 9 episodes, you don‘t want to go all the way back to our ancestors in Africa. I also feel that how the French blew it is depicted reasonably enough for the following context.

 

As Retnek says, the US has obviously not come to terms with how that clusterf**k came to happen. The series is more about the societies and the people of back then. Mr. Del Vecchio propagating the „What if?“ questions clearly shows he hasn‘t understood yet. Any „what if“ comes to the same end if the entire population of a county hates you. Well, unless you are ready for a Final Solution for them. Would that have been the American Way? I guess no. So all the musings about some rather minor details, whether they are depicted acurate enough, is just silly (unless done in such a forum in a civil manner). I didn‘t say it is perfect, but it gives an outstanding impression of what went on. Especially since a shocking few person still have a clue at all of what went on besides helicopters and Napalm.

 

One has to cut corners in making such a series, as history of a 10 year war „forum style“ takes 1000 years to recount...

[PatCartier]

I can't speak english so I will not write a long text. Just to say i think this documentary is great.

[CanadaOne]

As Retnek says, the US has obviously not come to terms with how that clusterf**k came to happen.

 

I don't think it was a clusterf**k. I think it was cold, calculated, and went pretty much according to plan. The goal was to conquer/destroy the region and keep the people down, and that's exactly what happened. Millions killed and several countries destroyed almost beyond repair. Some might say it was a resounding success.

[ZachariasX]

 

 

The goal was to conquer/destroy the region and keep the people down, and that's exactly what happened.

Hardly.

 

Given the costs for keeping a largely irrelevant country "down", if what you said was the aim, it would have been an even more obscene undertaking.

[Danziger]

Cost only matters to the taxpayers not the ones being paid handsomely for supplying war materials.

[CanadaOne]

Hardly.

 

Given the costs for keeping a largely irrelevant country "down", if what you said was the aim, it would have been an even more obscene undertaking.

 

War is good for business. And the aim was to keep that region suppressed, and boy did it ever work. Millions were killed to achieve that goal.  And to call it obscene is being very, very polite.  

 

That what happened, happened, and with such egregious and criminal brutality, shows the region to have been relevant indeed.

[Rjel]

I thought it was interesting history. Like every major world event, Vietnam wasn't as B/W as it might seem. The first episode was excellent in laying the background of French involvement. I like how Burns interspersed the way the U.S. followed nearly the same course and its mistakes in America's buildup to war. I also found it fascinating how time and again, the principles involved in leadership knew it wasn't a war anyone wanted to fight and yet didn't know how to get out of it.

[Cybermat47]

I've only heard about it from Vietnam Veterans. According to them, it's pretty biased.

[CanadaOne]

I haven't seen how the documentary discuses the bombing of Cambodia, but if it falls short of coming right out and calling it a major war crime, then there is no question the series is biased.

[SYN_Speck]

Even so many years later, it's a polarizing topic. One measure of success in presenting a balanced view of such a topic is the amount of criticism coming from those holding strong opinions on all sides.

 

Hopefully this documentary will encourage those holding strong pre-formed opinions re-evaluate those opinions- whatever their perspective.

 

Personally I've heard people who were active in the anti-war movement in the USA expressing that they felt their view was not fairly represented. Though I am generally inclined to sympathize with their end of the political spectrum, I disagree with this criticism with respect to this documentary; I think it does a pretty great job of documenting the perspectives of many various participants. 

 

As many of the participants are now getting on in years, I think it's great that the filmmakers recorded so many memories, from so many people on all sides and at all levels (though I would have liked to see more AZ/NZ/ROK veterans speak).

 

It was very interesting to see so many veterans speak so candidly, and to share how their perspectives had changed over the years. Amid so many tales of bravery, it's a great act of bravery to admit you were wrong.

 

The war was a great tragedy. I believe the people of the USA and the people of Vietnam should naturally be friends, and I think this documentary can help us understand the tragedy that happened.

[Original_Uwe]

Sweet Jesus.

I have yet to watch it. Vietnam was my dads war, and since coming home from my own in Iraq I just don't watch much stuff about war anymore.

 

That said, the only thing that we need to address here stateside is how we treated the soldiers coming home. It is our greatest national shame. That we The People decided to go fight in a war, then utterly and totally discarded the men who were drafted or volunteered to fight in it at our behest, is truly a crime.

 

I know for a fact that the only reason my generation of veterans was treated fairly was because the veterans of Vietnam vowed to never let another generation of fighting men be treated as they were when they answered our nations call to arms.

Edited October 4, 2017 by 1./JG54_Uwe

[CanadaOne]

He was protesting against the war at the time.

[Original_Uwe]

...

 

It was very interesting to see so many veterans speak so candidly, and to share how their perspectives had changed over the years. Amid so many tales of bravery, it's a great act of bravery to admit you were wrong.

 

The war was a great tragedy. I believe the people of the USA and the people of Vietnam should naturally be friends, and I think this documentary can help us understand the tragedy that happened.

Hmmm...agree to disagree?

Every man that went there was in the right.

It is all of our duty to our respective countries to answer a call to arms.

The veterans of Vietnam did just that, and have been ostracized for it for decades.

They did their duty, it is the society back home that dishonored their service that was wrong.

 

And friends? No, the only good lefty is a dead one.

Free westerners should never mingle with the likes of communists.

Edited October 4, 2017 by 1./JG54_Uwe

[Rolling_Thunder]

There seem to be many myths built up around that war. The anti war movement was not against the folk sent to the war. Just as the modern anti war movement in regards to Afghanistan and Iraq is not against the soldiers. In the begining the anti war movement was tiny, the majority were for the war in Vietnam. Of course there were those folk who's service to their country was disrespected and insulted. But you also had veterans who returned from the war that were active anti war protestors.

"The only good lefty is a dead lefty"

"all vietnam veterans were guilty of my lai".

To generalize is to continue the myth.

It was a terrible war that tore not only Vietnam apart but also the United States. It apears some wounds still havent healed. The veterans deserve our respect. So do the protestors. How many more lives would have been lost, in an unwinable war, if the war had continued if not for public opinion back home.

[ZachariasX]

I have yet to watch it. Vietnam was my dads war, and since coming home from my own in Iraq I just don't watch much stuff about war anymore.

 

What I find makes teh series outstanding as a documentary, is that it is a remarkably balanced and personal, or rather intimate, take on the whole issue. It is not your typical war documentary about who is tha bad guy, and when how and things were were blown up. It is about the people that took part and some of those people share their memories and impressions about the course of things. It is clearly stated what was done and when, but as the individial participants are also rather clear about themselves, there is also no need to qualify the course of action.

 

The only other film that comes to my mind that is somewhat alike, would be "The Fog Of War", the interview with McNamara. It has the same kind of intimacy as well as empathy to carry the audience (or at least that is how I felt) through of the other persons viewpoint. No more, no less. That is what you learn form it and not the definitve answer on who is guilty, the worst, etc.

 

That the US administartion taped most discussions helped a great lot as you can follow their reasoning. In the end, I think this documentary is one of the best defense of the participants, including the returning soldiers. It is a documentary about people trying to come to terms with themselves.

 

As McNamara concluded in his documentary, "People make errors".

[Gambit21]

War is good for business.

 

You can stop with that sentence.

[Danziger]

the only good ____ is a dead one.

_______ should never mingle with the likes of __________.

Exactly this kind of thinking is why mass genocide and war crimes will never go away.

 

Unfortunately it's not uncommon.

 

I spent three years in Iraq myself. While doing my duty I've seen first hand American, Georgian, and Iraqi soldiers going far beyond their duty and acting out of personal beliefs and emotions. Nothing is ever black and white. There is good and bad on every side. A lot of the time even in the same person.

[CanadaOne]

 

 

As McNamara concluded in his documentary, "People make errors".

 

The Vietnam war wasn't an error - it was very much by design, cold and calculated. As was the bombing of Laos and Cambodia, outright and massive war crimes by any definition. And the consequences were well understood and accepted.

 

Millions were killed for no good reason at all.

[CanadaOne]

Apparently Westmoreland thought about it to break the siege at Khe San.

[Gambit21]

its quite surprising they didnt drop the bomb

Uhh...no it isn't.

[CanadaOne]

"The Bomb" is bad for business.

 

10,000 "just bombs", on the other, are very good for business!

[Rjel]

Having watched to entire series a couple of times, I'd highly recommend it to anyone who has even a passing interest in the Vietnam war. Instead of someone basing their decision to watch it or not because someone else said good or ill of the of the series, pick out an episode and watch a few minutes. I can say with a fair amount of certainty you'll find yourself engrossed in it. I think it was a very balanced documentary. This is the way history should be told.

[Gambit21]

I plan on watching when/if I can find it.

I neglected to set my DVR this time around.

[JimTM]

I plan on watching when/if I can find it.

I neglected to set my DVR this time around.

Check your local listings; I think they may be repeating it. I saw it listed on the Buffalo PBS lineup but I don't remember what night. It may have been at an odd hour. Edited October 7, 2017 by JimTM

[room39]

Good suggestion for good information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

บาคาร่าออนไลน์

[Retnek]

... The anti war movement was not against the folk sent to the war. Just as the modern anti war movement in regards to Afghanistan and Iraq is not against the soldiers ...

That's a simple truth a lot of veterans don't see until today. Yes, there are people with "progressive attitudes" trying to make a simple grunt responsible for the madness of a nation going to war. Those idiots easily can destroy hours of talking and mutual approach. But those are rare exceptions, mostly motivated by the ignorance of youth or a general lack of compassion. People who would sacrifice their son for their god ...

   Building up artificial barriers makes it even more difficult for the veterans to find their way back into civil life. There is no part of the society "standing against the veterans", that's just a propaganda lie. It's a fundamental need for the let's-go-to-war-propagandists to divide the experts and victims of war (= veterans) from civil movements at home. Sadly it's quite easy for them to generate a kind of camp mentality, combining hollow phrases about "proudly serving the nation" with macho-attitudes and cheap statements "we're with you".

  No, they are not. Family, partner, children, parents and friends are with them. They have to deal with the "collateral damage" at home. Ask them, if you're looking for the truth of the-follow-up-war at home.

  Veterans mostly feel that "being proud of been to hell" is a perverted setup. But it's a long and hard way to uncover the single elements and come to conclusions leading out of the misery.

[CanadaOne]

 . . . and victims of war (= veterans) . . .

 

 

 

 

The true victims of the war were the millions killed in South East Asia for no good reason at all. Three countries were laid waste... and for what?

 

Millions of tons of bombs were dropped on Laos and Cambodia and a lot of those bombs remain in the ground, unexploded. Tens of thousands of farmers and children have been killed and had limbs amputated because of unexploded ordinance since the end of the war, and people are still being killed today. (2 or 3 have been killed since this thread began, if you cite recent figures.)

 

Of course people should speak out for the veterans. Likewise, people should speak out for the millions of ordinary people killed, maimed, and their lives ruined because of that senseless and senselessly brutal war.

[Retnek]

There are no "true victims", what's that? I refuse to build such an absurd hierarchy. Such statement is building up artificial walls, there is no "see/no-see choice" forcing you look on one kind of victim exclusively. They are all victims - the veterans know first hand what happened and how a land is ruined by war.

  It's fate if you are born in an area once becoming a war-ground. It's fate if you are born into a society spoiling the youth with patriotism, nationalism and phrases like "right or wrong - my country". Lot's of 18-year-old are not able to see part of their education was a kind of brain-wash.

 

  There would be a simple solution for this: a law refusing any soldier below the age of 35 to participate in operations beyond his own states territory.

[Danziger]

There would be a simple solution for this: a law refusing any soldier below the age of 35 to participate in operations beyond his own states territory.

An even simpler and more effective solution for keeping the peace would be to arm the politicians leading the opposing nations and have them meet to fight to the death on a battlefield.

[CanadaOne]

There are no "true victims", what's that? I refuse to build such an absurd hierarchy. Such statement is building up artificial walls, there is no "see/no-see choice" forcing you look on one kind of victim exclusively. They are all victims - the veterans know first hand what happened and how a land is ruined by war.

  It's fate if you are born in an area once becoming a war-ground. It's fate if you are born into a society spoiling the youth with patriotism, nationalism and phrases like "right or wrong - my country". Lot's of 18-year-old are not able to see part of their education was a kind of brain-wash.

 

  There would be a simple solution for this: a law refusing any soldier below the age of 35 to participate in operations beyond his own states territory.

 

It is not an absurd hierarchy. The guy flying the B-52 had the luxury of many more personal choices before he arrived at his situation of dropping the bombs than did the family in Cambodia who received the bombs on their heads while having breakfast.

 

Fate does not excuse criminal behavior.

[Retnek]

It is not an absurd hierarchy. The guy flying the B-52 had the luxury of many more personal choices before he arrived at his situation of dropping the bombs than did the family in Cambodia who received the bombs on their heads while having breakfast.

 

Fate does not excuse criminal behavior.

You're pointing on a good point, but they way you do it is brutish. Young person need a proper education and lot of freedom to develop that kind of early responsibility you're demanding. Some still need to become 25 until it shows, far beyond the age they are usually drafted or lured into war. A youth without that privileged education points your way into a fatal direction nearly without any choice. But you did no crime being raised that way. Read the veterans literature - it's full of the deepest regrets. Who are you not to offer understanding?

 

(Later, after a long period of civil life and the chance to reflect, you're right to ask them for the lessons learned. If they still don't show any insight one might start to talk about a criminal behaviour.)

[Rolling_Thunder]

As a companion piece to the tv show may I recommend Vietnam The definitive oral history, told from all sides. I read it years ago and found it very moving

[Rolling_Thunder]

It was a different time. A lot of the veterans interviewed said the same thing. This was a war that was only 20 years after the second world war. Their fathers war. A "just war". America, at the time, was seen as a just nation, saviors whether one believes that or not. We live in a different era and it's pretty easy to pass judgement on the past and it's participants.

War is nasty business

"Fate does not excuse criminal behavior." If dropping bombs in a war is criminal behavior why are you playing a game that simulates "criminal behaviour"? "Grand theft il2"

Nobody is going to put a gun in your hands raaaid, don't you worry about that.