Thread: Why thank a vet, they aren't fighting for our freedom, they are fighting for the bank

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

You know.

I read posts like these, and all sheer historical ignorance that people display in these threads and I often wonder. Where does it come from?

I go to the library, and go to the section on the vietnam war, and pick up any book, any one at all, and none of them ever claim any of the revisionist fake history that I see on the internet, or the beliefs I see in threads like this.

Nowhere do any of the history books claim the Gulf of Tonkin was faked. No where do any of the books claim "the military industrial complex" and "the banks" and "the corporations" were locked away in their boardrooms looking for ways to start wars. No where in any of the transcripts of presidential meetings of interviews with national security advisors does even a hint of any of these massive conspiracies come to light.

I'd sure like to know, how 40 years of scholarly, peer reviewed and respected historical research somehow missed all of these (*)(*)(*)(*)ing events. I mean, are all these historical experts bought and paid for shills? Are all these scholars and academics and military historians somehow part of the conspiracy?

I'd sure like to know why, only on the internet in the most obscure and unreliable sources, do these stories come to light.. and why I should believe any of it when there is so much evidence against it?

Put down the (*)(*)(*)(*) wikipedia, put down the crazy conspiracy blogs, and go to your local library, pick up a book.. learn something and quit feeding your minds garbage.

Way to make a completely unsubstantiative argument.

Originally Posted by Jack Ridley

Way to make a completely unsubstantiative argument.

I"m not making any argument, but an observation.

Continue with your wild circle jerk of evil rothschilds locked in rooms with fat cigars pulling their puppet strings and completely dismiss me.

I will continue with the enlightenment of true history and not the darkness of ignorance and the tinfoil hat and frankly, laugh at all of you.

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

I"m not making any argument, but an observation.

Continue with your wild circle jerk of evil rothschilds locked in rooms with fat cigars pulling their puppet strings and completely dismiss me.

I will continue with the enlightenment of true history and not the darkness of ignorance and the tinfoil hat and frankly, laugh at all of you.

Technically ad homs(like the one quoted) are observations but whatever implied point you had was fallacious.

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

You know.

I read posts like these, and all sheer historical ignorance that people display in these threads and I often wonder. Where does it come from?

I go to the library, and go to the section on the vietnam war, and pick up any book, any one at all, and none of them ever claim any of the revisionist fake history that I see on the internet, or the beliefs I see in threads like this.

Nowhere do any of the history books claim the Gulf of Tonkin was faked. No where do any of the books claim "the military industrial complex" and "the banks" and "the corporations" were locked away in their boardrooms looking for ways to start wars. No where in any of the transcripts of presidential meetings of interviews with national security advisors does even a hint of any of these massive conspiracies come to light. Not just vietnam, but any war. I can go to the library and pick up 3 books on Iraq and Afghanistan written by Bob Woodward (The Bush's Wars series) and in all that well researched scholarly examination do any of these wild motives like wars for oil, or banks or corporations, etc show themselves? No, not a hint. I read the wikileaks, thousands of them, never once does a hint of any of these nefarious actors and motives show themselves.

I'd sure like to know, how all these years of scholarly, peer reviewed and respected historical research somehow missed all of these (*)(*)(*)(*)ing events. I mean, are all these historical experts bought and paid for shills? Are all these scholars and academics and military historians somehow part of the conspiracy?

I'd sure like to know why, only on the internet in the most obscure and unreliable sources, do these stories come to light.. and why I should believe any of it when there is so much evidence against it?

Put down the (*)(*)(*)(*) wikipedia, put down the crazy conspiracy blogs, and go to your local library, pick up a book.. learn something and quit feeding your minds tabloid garbage.

Um..the Gulf of Tonkin being faked is an absolute fact. The fact that to this day none of the history books reveal that little tidbit of info, one would think, would bring an intelligent person over to the side of doubt in mainstream information. It is documented fact. Whether the powers that be let the Japanese hit Pearl Harbor is up to debate. But the Spanish-American War and the Vietnam conflict being rigged is absolute fact.

President Johnson as to the Gulf of Tonkin:

In 1965, President Johnson commented privately: "For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there."

Originally Posted by Til the Last Drop

Um..the Gulf of Tonkin being faked is an absolute fact. The fact that to this day none of the history books reveal that little tidbit of info, one would think, would bring an intelligent person over to the side of doubt in mainstream information. It is documented fact. Whether the powers that be let the Japanese hit Pearl Harbor is up to debate. But the Spanish-American War and the Vietnam conflict being rigged is absolute fact.

President Johnson as to the Gulf of Tonkin:

It appears "American" history books have omitted the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was faked. I wonder why this is?

I suggest everyone watch the doco- "Fog of War- Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S McNamara".

Then don't thank them. The fact remains that many veterans were and are placed in harms way honoring their commitment to the services. Whether drafted as in wars past or volunteers, there is nobility in that.

Originally Posted by lizarddust

It appears "American" history books have omitted the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was faked. I wonder why this is?

Most countries fabricate their own national blunders, I would assume. At this point, one would get better history from reading about their own nation's history written by a nation who had no stock in the matter. However, as the global regime assumes total control, we must also assume shovels full of bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is all any of us will be offered from here on out.

Originally Posted by Herkdriver

Then don't thank them. The fact remains that many veterans were and are placed in harms way honoring their commitment to the services. Whether drafted as in wars past or volunteers, there is nobility in that.

I agree. Hate those in control. To hate all those under their control is to hate everyone, including one's self, for we are all their pawns. Surely that can't be productive. No point in singling out military, who are their greatest victims.

Originally Posted by Til the Last Drop

Most countries fabricate their own national blunders, I would assume. At this point, one would get better history from reading about their own nation's history written by a nation who had no stock in the matter. However, as the global regime assumes total control, we must also assume shovels full of bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is all any of us will be offered from here on out.

Some years ago whilst tripping around Vietnam, I had a long chat with a Vietnamese guy. At 17 he was drafted into the ARVN. After six months he was captured by at VC and made to fight for them. Rare indeed as the VC usually executed their prisoners. He fought another 10 months with the VC until the end of the war.

What he said blew me out, not him fighting for the VC, but he mentioned most Vietnamese history books don't mention the war with America.

Originally Posted by lizarddust

Some years ago whilst tripping around Vietnam, I had a long chat with a Vietnamese guy. At 17 he was drafted into the ARVN. After six months he was captured by at VC and made to fight for them. Rare indeed as the VC usually executed their prisoners. He fought another 10 months with the VC until the end of the war.

What he said blew me out, not him fighting for the VC, but he mentioned most Vietnamese history books don't mention the war with America.

Yeah, that just blew my mind. That is a good example of what I mean. Now imagine when the global regime can rule outright, no longer cast to the shadows. Humanity is headed for a 1000 year long 2nd dark ages.