Of all the major American wars..

Woah! Difficult choices. Initially thought of Korea because of the cold, it being a UN action, the severity of battle. Then the civil war with the country torn, ideologies at odds, the crude medical treatment. WWI with the trenchs and huge loss of life. IDK, this is tough. Having never experienced battle, it is horrifying to think of.

While all wars are a terrible thing for all the actual participants. The civil war for me would be the worst. The medical treatments were nasty. I just watched a doc where they explained how a small infection would almost assuredly result in an amputation. A civil war Dr.( i forget his name, a lot of weed, and to much porn. short term memory is shot) was responsible for discovery of penicillin, 9 years after the war ended. Not to mention the social implications of the war, brother fighting brother and all that jazz...

consequently, also the last war that was actually fought for our rights, or at least over rights, states rights. and I do believe the south still was in the right. States have the right to secede if they wish.



Then theres Vietnam. Wow, what a shithole that must have been. I know a lot of guys got messed up over there, psychologically, as well as physically. which happens in every war, but i dont know, maybe it just seems to be more pronounced through the way its portrayed in the media and entertainment. It does seem like we were at some of our most brutal and humanely degrading acts in that one. So i guess im glad i missed that one.

Although having never seen what a battle field is like up and running, I choose Vietnam. Just the thought of all those traps that were set and whatnot, and tunnels with hidden tunnels that the bastards would spear your through. I'm sure all wars are nasty in their own way, just all the other wars when I pictured being in them, I could see my enemy. Vietnam I just picture an endless forest and random gun fire coming from unknown locations.

unohu69 said:

While all wars are a terrible thing for all the actual participants. The civil war for me would be the worst. The medical treatments were nasty. I just watched a doc where they explained how a small infection would almost assuredly result in an amputation. A civil war Dr.( i forget his name, a lot of weed, and to much porn. short term memory is shot) was responsible for discovery of penicillin, 9 years after the war ended. Not to mention the social implications of the war, brother fighting brother and all that jazz...

consequently, also the last war that was actually fought for our rights, or at least over rights, states rights. and I do believe the south still was in the right. States have the right to secede if they wish.



Then theres Vietnam. Wow, what a shithole that must have been. I know a lot of guys got messed up over there, psychologically, as well as physically. which happens in every war, but i dont know, maybe it just seems to be more pronounced through the way its portrayed in the media and entertainment. It does seem like we were at some of our most brutal and humanely degrading acts in that one. So i guess im glad i missed that one.

Click to expand...

the vietnam conflict was made so horrible by the doctrines of the political leaders (same doctrines used today) where the enemy is not REALLY an enemy, and the local people are your freinds... winning hearts and minds... all that bullshit makes the reality of the war much more personal, since it was ALL CRAP

the occupying foreign troops are NEVER gonna win hearts and minds, they will be viewed as a threat until they leave.


heres some REAL history about the vietnam conflict and why it was a fucked up un-american thing to do:

french indo-china was dominated by the frogs for nearly a century with all the oppression and brutality the frogs could muster. when ww2 started, the french just bugged out, leaving the viet people unarmed at the mercy of the japanese, and they fought the japs THEMSELVES with no help from anybody, led by Ho Chi Minh.
after VJ day the viets finished pushing the japs out of their country and decalred themselves free, but the french said, "ohh no you silly little orientals, you still belong to us."
Ho Chi Minh sent a letter to eisenhower detailing their constitution (which was basically the US constitution with "USA" crossed out and "Vietnam" scribbled in) and asking for the US tio tell the french to keep out. eisenhower ignored the letter and never responded.
the french started bombing, killing and basically fucking over the viets,, so Ho and his boys turned to China and Uncle Mao for help, the price of that help was marxism, mao style.
after the french got their asses kicked they cried out for help, eisenhower started sending troops to help the french, and later the Sout Viet puppet regime.

the entire debacle was a result of eisenhower (and truman and kennedy and nixon) being unwilling to stand up for freedom against, of all people,, THE FRENCH.

our soldiers sent to vietnam were there as hessians serving the interests of everything BUT american values. they were hated and feared as mercenaries always are, and only the willing disbelief of the political hacks in washington allowed this shameful war to continue. men sent to the jungles of southeast asia were told they were fighting for the american way, but they KNEW they were not, this resulted in internal conflict. they were told they were doing the wrong things for the right reasons and THIS is why so many came back fucked up. who is to blame for vietnam being the most shameful chapter in our history?

the democrats AND the republicans, both sides couldnt be for the war fast enough, both sides urged for it, both sides profited from it and both sides claimed it was the other guy's fault when public opinion turned.
also bearing the blame: the press. walter cronkite and the new york times lovbbied for the war to sell papers and get butts in the seats, and then lobbied against the war later for EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS. a bad war won would have been far better than a bad war lost,, the pres ensured we would lose by insisting we were failing at every turn.

iraq and afghanistan followed the same failed doctrines, and failed just as hard. if you must go to war you must go to win, not to make friends.

Padawanbater2 said:

..which one would you least like to have fought in?

Click to expand...

The civil war, because it resulted in many deaths as war does, but the reason for killing each other and dieing ourselves didn't merit doing so.
IMO abolishing slavery shouldn't have even been debated, and the only reason it was is because it would not doing so would result is loss of money by some.(horrible reason to die for).

that or,

The korean was, because those damn koreans fight dirty.

My choice is the Civil War. It was bloody, dirty, nasty, and general anesthesia was an emerging idea. The idea of getting a war wound back then is awful to me. It also led to the first great wave of morphine addiction in the States. cn

Tours of duty. In most of those wars, if you manage to survive you were free. Not so with this last one, even if you get home safe, you might have to do it again - and there are a lot of people who become dangers to themselves as well. I'd hate to come home seemingly whole and then wind up doing it to myself.

Lying in the dirt with your guts blown out is the same in 2012 as it was in 1775, 1812, 1846, 1861, 1869, 1918, 1945, 1950, 1955,...............................

ptg701 said:

Lying in the dirt with your guts blown out is the same in 2012 as it was in 1775, 1812, 1846, 1861, 1869, 1918, 1945, 1950, 1955,...............................

Click to expand...

Yes, but once the medic comes, that's where the difference lies. Your chances of survival and good care are vastly better since WWII. cn