Friends, I'm not entirely sure what these "internets" are, but I hear they're riddled with lefties! Case in point: Netflix, a woke digital entertainment emporium, which is still angling to capture even more insidious influence over the global consciousness. My latest article is a call to arms against this behemoth:
In other news, I made more news! Specifically, the latest Newsmakers broadcast includes a segment where Brian and I analyze some of the most important developments of the 1960s through the early 1990s. It's good, clean historical fun!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Re the latest Newsmaker broadcast: I'm 78 and a Vietnam veteran . I make no claim thereby to infallibility or immunity from criticism for my views. This is simply how I remember it and the views it fostered in me:
ReplyDeleteThe Tonkin Gulf Incident: our ships were in the Gulf and so very close to the shore of Vietnam, for the very good reason of intimidating the savage N.Vietnam commies from trying to force their rule on the still relatively free S. Vietnam. I agree that we had a larger strategic reason: we were applying the catastrophically realized lesson from WWII that appeasement of totalitarians is futile. Communist conquest of all of SE Asia was a very plausible prospect (the commies had already tried to take Malaya, their main objective, which then included the future independent Singapore but were defeated by a Britain which knew all about totalitarian threats).
RAY TO JACK
DeleteI'm not trying to antagonize you, but I'm a veteran too. As far as Vietnam goes, were you a Vietnam era veteran, or did you actually serve at one of our bases in Vietnam? If so, were you in combat, or did you work in a rear area supply dump?
I'm in your age group and served in The Air Force, but I don't consider myself a Vietnam veteran. The closest I ever got to the place was flying over the Mekong Delta, in this case, as a passenger in an AF tanker refueling fighter aircraft in the area. The boom operator, while consuming a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, commented, "There must be fighting going on down there".
I recall you were in the Navy, so where in Vietnam were you, if you were ever there at all. So, are you a real Vietnam veteran, or just a Vietnam era veteran like me?
RAY TO JACK
DeleteMaybe if France had not "invaded" what became Indochina back in the 19th Century, then Ho Chi Minh might not have become a communist. What if!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Vietnam cont.: Thus repelled , the commies , egged on by the Soviets and Chinese , adopted the strategy accurately described as the domino theory , that of incipient one by one conquest of S.E. Asian countries until they gained the Straits of Malacca. Such an outcome was utterly intolerable to the West because the commies would have used control of the Straits, an incalculably important passage for world commerce , trade and military movement , to intimidate the non Communist world.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: We see today what nonCommunist leaders realized then, when we experience the vitality of the Strait of Hormuz. Imagine ever expansive commies sitting on the Bosporus or Dardenelles or the Straits of Gibraltar: UNTHINKABLE! So was a commie regime at Singapore!
ReplyDeleteToo, consider the slaughter and enslavement of millions which surely would have resulted from commie conquest of all of S.E Asia. That was proven to be guaranteed by the inhumanly savage oppression the triumphant commies worked on Vietnam , Cambodia and Laos. Yes , our effort was centered on US interests BUT, as American history often proves , especially in our Mexican and Civil War wars and in the 20th century , ours is "the flag that sets you free". Sorry far lefties, its the truth.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Vietnam cont. As President Reagan unapologetically asserted : "our cause in Vietnam was just!" It was torpedoed within our very country largely by the tragically naive radical faction of the teeming boomer generation
ReplyDeleteand their cynical Marxist "revolutionary"mentors on the campuses to which they flocked courtesy of the lovingly intended generosity of that Greatest Generation which knew simple right from wrong and had painfully shown its willing to fight for it. Vietnam was a battle we lost, because of treachery at home, in a decisive Cold War we won and in which we thereby saved the world from the threat of the worst political doctrine ever to plague humanity.
But our prolonged effort there was not completely wasted ; I believe it cautioned the Soviets on American military resolve and eventually helped to finally convince them that they would never be able outlast us, no matter how they bankrupted their country. Oh they knew those American traitors for what they were , a passing disgraceful phenomenon which they would have summarily crushed in their own realm.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I started paying attention to current events in 1960. In that time, in my opinion the two most astonishing developments have been space exploration and the fall of communism . (The latter of course makes ever the more ironic marxism's current resolve to take revenge on its long proven worst enemy , America, by actually subjugating it.) Under our present administration we have almost fully realized this bizarre threat to all we cherish and are actively resisting its present counterintuitive surge in our country. For far too long we have, with good intentions , tolerated this fundamental danger.
ReplyDeleteThe late '80's were an astonishingly heady time. We who grew up with the routinely ever present threat of world communism could never have anticipated how the triumphant trio of Saint John Paul, Lech Walesa and President Reagan combined with US power to achieve the previously unthinkable ! It is unendingly redeeming to know that our country played a key role in the deliverance of many, many millions from totalitarian oppression "justified" by an utterly corrupt doctrine and its murderously vicious enforcers!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Re the Newsmaker broadcast again: I think the Soviet Union started committing suicide when it became the Soviet Union. True , it was Gorbachev's despairing realization that ":we cannot go on like this anymore" 74 years later which finished it. But the lives which were wasted!! 74 years is a long time to live under commie misrule.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: What are some ways we can oppose Netflix and support the Warner Brothers - Paramount deal, aside from boycotting Netflix? It appears to me that aside from far left activist AGs and probably their Governors no other state officials are involved. Maybe the Feds; eg. the FCC or the DOJ (the latter for possible violations of the Interstate Commerce Clause on the part of those AGs who choose, for indefensible ideological reasons, to bollox up the deal.) ? We could bid our Federal reps to urge the DOJ to make a case against the characteristically far left opposition to this manifestation of the free enterprise they reflexively disdain. Senators and House members could be contacted except of course in NY state where our two US Senators are disdainful of any opinions opposite to theirs'. And those two WOULD oppose anything which helps to disempower the far left.
ReplyDeleteThe radicals are loathe of course to lose such a party organ as Netflix. The "American " far left has suffered deserved attack by the Trump administration for its incipiently totalitarian infestation of several vital American institutions (eg. the "entertainment" - read indoctrination - industry, the American Academy and the American legality). That presumptuously "revolutionary" rump is getting mighty defensive; they dread another emotionally devastating setback by losing the compliant comradeship of Netflix. They are losing some of their erstwhile disingenuous hold on the broadcast "news" and they know that such a deep inroad on their control of the debauched American entertainment industry could presage disaster for them.
Americans cherish their passive, homebound entertainment and why not? The leisure afforded us by high pressure modern civilization is a blessing but the Marxist radicals our country tolerates cynically misuse it in their fanatically determined effort to turn us into powerless subjects terroristically forced to comply with marxism's historically proven arbitrary and incidental whims. They are moved mostly by their compelling emotions and we can work much debilitating upset upon them by standing against this power protecting subterfuge on their parts.
Ray from Jack: I am not antagonized by your inquiry.
ReplyDeleteI was on the carrier Constellation for three campaigns in the Gulf close to the Vietnamese coast , both North and South. Our pilots went into intense combat every day out there and the ship's crew which supported them also received combat pay. Though we were not attacked in time I was aboard we could have been at any time and in May'72 when I was still there a few ships were air assaulted. We were on increased alert at that time. Frankly I do not know why we weren't fired upon from the shore, we were in very close. The VA now honors the "Blue Water Bill" which recognizes that we were ingesting Agent Orange out there.
I did once , very briefly , set foot in country at DaNang Airbase .Altogether, I do consider myself a Vietnam War Veteran BUT. . . I most certainly sincerely defer to anyone who served incountry. They are entitled to the distinct honor of wearing the Combat Infantryman's Badge . I would also like to have seen them receive a higher monthly amount of combat pay than we did.
RAY TO JACK
DeleteYou are a real Vietnam veteran, in my book. Thanks.
Ray from Jack: I think Ho Chi MInh's patriotic efforts to drive the French out were honorable. I believe his savage communist rule of North Vietnam was detestable.
ReplyDeleteRAY TO JACK
ReplyDeleteI apologize for questioning your statement that you are a Vietnam veteran. Thanks for explaining it, and your patience in the wake of my nonsense remarks, because that's what they are.
I also appreciate the fact that you contribute much more to this site than I do, and with well thought out comments.
Thanks.
Ray from Jack: No problem. A Vietnam vet should be willing to support that claim. I think those in the Air Force who served on bases outside Vietnam but close to it played a vital part in the war. Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that some Air Force personnel were exposed to Agent Orange from loading it on planes. My opinion would be that if you flew over Vietnam during the war on a military mission that you are a Vietnam War vet but I respect your view on it. I should add , I was not a pilot; I was a Third Class Signalman in the ship's crew.
ReplyDeleteRAY TO JACK
DeleteI was just a Staff Sergeant in the Air Force when I flew over Vietnam, in a KC-135.
Not surprised that some Air Force personnel were exposed to Agent Orange.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Another "insolently" lawful decision by Scotus on redistricting has been rendered , this time in Alabama. The DSA/Dems are approaching critical mass on this. They have never gotten over the unfeudal defection of their longtime Scotus fief.
ReplyDeleteDSA/Dem exemplar AOC appears thereby to have gone to hyperbolic stratospherics and expectorates her conviction that it is Tennessee's long suppressed ambition to eradicate ANY form of governmental representation for blacks.
Of course respect for the rule of law is not the DSA/Dem party's long suit , being as they expect "the law" to bend to their unimpeachable whims, upon their very demand. When it doesn't , they go to the barricades. Did the law require that Barack Obama twice be elected President? I think Scotus's Louisiana redistricting decision also provides legal authority for seeking relief from any law specifically and purposely working harm for racial minorities. Sorry DSA/Dems, you are just going to have to live with that unless you are someday able to reprise a Scotus which is your rubber stamp.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I mean above ". . . any law specifically and purposefully working harm for racial minorities in the specific governmental unit the authority of which is used (eg. for districting ,a state).
ReplyDeleteGerrymandering to assure a predetermined amount of minority representation is based on the presumption that any number of minority representatives below that is , BY DEFINITION, WITH NO NEED OF MORE EVIDENCE, unjust and must be remedied by artificial means, no matter the wishes of the electorate. It is typical of the far left's proven willingness to force its ways"by any means necessary". Scotus has upheld the rule of law in this setting by saying and meaning that race cannot be one of those means.
Jack, certainly our navy had a perfect right to be in the Gulf of Tonkin, but we can't rule out the possibility that we were there mainly to entice the North Vietnamese into doing something stupid that we could then use to justify intervention in the conflict. We were aware by then that things were not going well in the South, and that, failing an injection of U.S. manpower, ARVN probably wasn't going to be able to hold on. So I don't find it all that unbelievable that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a set-up...but that doesn't mean I think it was a bad idea.
ReplyDeleteThe other consideration here is that we had repeatedly used Congressional resolutions in the preceding years to scare off the commies when they looked like they were getting grabby. We may not have intended the Gulf of Tonkin resolution to lead to war, therefore, because we may have assumed it would be enough in itself to get the Reds to back down.
Jack, I personally wouldn't pooh-pooh the domino theory. Sure, it may be pessimistic, but sometimes worst case scenarios come to pass. In any event, if we wanted our containment policy to be taken seriously, once in a while we would have to take a stand against communist aggression. If not in Vietnam, then where?
While I don't agree that the Soviets and the Chinese were disheartened by what transpired in Vietnam -- quite the opposite, I suspect -- the fact remained that they expended vast resources to capture what was, in retrospect, a fairly marginal piece of real estate. Thus, the communist cause may ultimately have been harmed by their Indochinese adventure, even if it may not have seemed that way in April 1975.
Great point that 74 years of communism is a long sentence for any country to serve... Those poor Russkies still aren't entirely over it. I maintain that the only reason Soviet communism lasted as long as it did was because it wasn't all that communist, when you got right down to it. It was more a corrupt oligarchy than an egalitarian utopia.
Jack, alas, I don't think there's much hope of destroying or even hobbling Netflix, which will thus continue to do great damage to our culture, which is, at the end of the day, far more important than our politics. I'm merely suggesting that we don't need to give Netflix any MORE power over our collective consciousness...
Ray, your point about Vietnam vets is a reasonable one, I think. Lots of people served in that era, and even in that theater, without taking on much risk of bodily harm or experiencing any great psychic torment. We shouldn't assume that all "vets" are the same: either in nobility, or heroism, or toughness, on one hand; or physical injury, or psychological dysfunction, or bloodlust, on the other. Judge each man by his record and the "contents of his character", I say.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: Perhaps the best examples of almost unalloyed commie rule were Cambodia and Maoist China and Marxism proved itself incalculably evil in those hell holes.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: That is a very good point: maybe the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was understandably
ReplyDeletethought to be a credible deterrent to further commie aggression in Vietnam. It was backed by carrier raids on N. Vietnamese military targets. When the commies upped the ante , we met it ; we had given them warning after their Tonkin Gulf sortie after all.
Would history have faulted France and/or Great Britain for having opposed Hitler's first reckless and gangsterish foreign imposition: the reoccupation of the Rhineland and his summary defiance of the Versailles Treaty. The free and civilized world was taught an exceedingly painful lesson by that amoral monster. In fits and starts, it applied it against virulently expansive communism and , yes. led by the US, won without waging another world war.
Jack, alas, there is no perfect recipe for achieving world peace and/or disarming aggressors, current and future. It's all an improvisation, and I would say that, on balance, the Cold War was a mighty good improvisation on our part.
ReplyDelete