Wednesday at Stoke
Full Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 22,230
- Supports
- Time Travel
It is a factual documentary series and in no way whatsoever a white-wash.
Do they talk about the war crimes?
It is a factual documentary series and in no way whatsoever a white-wash.
Do they talk about the war crimes?
Yep!at that point they were just too heavily invested in the whole thing.
Only at episode 3 so far, and they've not exactly portrayed the American intervention in a positive light.
Going by the general approach of the series I'd say they definitely will mention them.
They do cover it in a very even handed way. The whole series has great integrity and is uncomfortable viewing for many on the "Western" side.If they didn't and assuming you haven't already, you should read up about the My Lai massacre. There's a pair of really awesome NewYorker articles on that.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1972/01/22/i-coverup
Is this a white-washed story of American heroism or do they mention war crimes like the My Lai massacre?
Really want to watch this but it's so long.
I usually watch this type of stuff on Kodi. If you have it?Where can this be watched in the UK at the moment?
Just read in time, thanks 2cents.Starting on BBC4 tonight with the first two episodes at 22:30.
^I got finished with it a couple of weeks ago, a right old slog to get through but by 'eck it is really, really good.
Really want to watch this but it's so long.
It's funny you quoted me. Because afterwards I did watch the doc in full. Amazing doc. Was worth the time.That is because it was an extremely complex situation.
To appreciate it and to put it into context, it is important to understand the way that the world was then.
Heavily dominated by the spread of Communism and the Cold War.
President Kennedy had inherited a very difficult and devisive set of conditions. Especially for such a young and inexperienced in foreign affairs President.
He was determined to prevent another country falling into Communist hands but had absolutely no idea how inept South Vietnam actually was.
By the way. If you think that the programme is long, try reading The Vietnam War in wiki.
I always found this war interesting because from my understanding, the Americans (which they often perceive themselves to be the hero) were the side in the wrong in a big way and should never have been there in the first place. In fact, it was seemingly doomed from the outset because they were fighting against people wanting to live their lives relatively peacefully without foreign intervention (even if they did take supplies from Russia and China) and for some form of gain.
I actually had this discussion with a German friend of mine the other day regarding German Army men in ww2 and those that fought because they had/were made to, not necessarily because they agreed with the Nazi regime, and whether those people are honoured in Germany even though their countries leaders did a horrible thing. Similarly the same could be said with US soldier in this war. Neither of them won, yet seemingly history forgets the sacrifices alot of good people made in the name of their Country even if they didnt agree with government regime or the people calling the shots.
I guess its hard to discuss these issues because there are people that agree with the government rhetoric, but others that don't but are forced into situations otherwise facing prison time.
I always found this war interesting because from my understanding, the Americans (which they often perceive themselves to be the hero) were the side in the wrong in a big way and should never have been there in the first place. In fact, it was seemingly doomed from the outset because they were fighting against people wanting to live their lives relatively peacefully without foreign intervention (even if they did take supplies from Russia and China) and for some form of gain.
I actually had this discussion with a German friend of mine the other day regarding German Army men in ww2 and those that fought because they had/were made to, not necessarily because they agreed with the Nazi regime, and whether those people are honoured in Germany even though their countries leaders did a horrible thing. Similarly the same could be said with US soldier in this war. Neither of them won, yet seemingly history forgets the sacrifices alot of good people made in the name of their Country even if they didnt agree with government regime or the people calling the shots.
I guess its hard to discuss these issues because there are people that agree with the government rhetoric, but others that don't but are forced into situations otherwise facing prison time.
The most criminal part, aside from bombing Laos and Cambodia with more munitions than were dropped in the entirety of World War Two, was that they knew they couldn't win in the early to mid sixties and it continued nearly a decade or so after, sending thousands of Americans to their deaths and killing millions of Asians in the process. In fact, it became more of a horror war after they understood victory wasn't feasible.
They also knew that the Gulf of Tonkin had nothing to do with the North Vietnamese but used it as a predicate for armament.
Not quite true yet back then. You can in fact even argue that the decades long spent in Vietnam entrenched the role of the military-industrial complex in their economy, even more so than the Cold War arms race, to the detriment of the economy as a whole.The US run on a war economy. These need it for "jobs and growth". They dont care how many people die as long as it helps keep the economy ticking over.