Vietnam Lawsuit

[miko2d]

Gunslinger: "Against whom?"

South vietnamese, US GIs, and their own people.

 They did not invite US GI's ti visit. so they hardly bear any obligations to them like, say, a tourist agency would to its clients.
 As for their own people, they will sort it out.

All I was saying in my comments was that vietnam complaining about human rights violations is irony at its best.

 You must be confusing this case with something else. They do not sue for "rights violations". They sue for specific damage caused to their health by the use of illegal chemical terror-weapon.

It would be like japanese sueing boeing for manufacturing the planes that fire-bombed tokyo and dropped the A-bombs.

 Right. The companies bear no responcibility to vietnamese. On the other hand if the US Government gets sued and is found liable for damages, and if the companies claimed that the stuff was safe to spray on people, then the Government could sue the companies to recoup the losses.

 In case of Japan, I believe all US liabilities were cleared when the peace treaty was signed.

 Of course when US was a victorious side, it had no problem suing and punishing the company managers for the use of their products by the government - just check the Nuremberg trials.


In adition I'm tired of this attitude that US vietnam vets were complete monsters the north was just as bad if not worse.

 I am not sure that has anything to do with any alleged monstrocities of US troops. The stuff was sprayed from the airplanes, not by infantry.

 miko

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by Fishu
US commited SEVERAL war crimes in vietnam.

But not nearly as many as the VC or NVA.

[Gunslinger]

miko since when is agent orange an "illegal chemical terror-weapon" ?   Check your history.  It was a chemical used to clear some of the jungle foliage.  A LOT! different than mustard gas and nerve agents

You must be confusing this case with something else. They do not sue for "rights violations". They sue for specific damage caused to their health by the use of illegal chemical terror-weapon.

This was an argument with somone else in this thread.  Related but not directed to the subject

Right. The companies bear no responcibility to vietnamese. On the other hand if the US Government gets sued and is found liable for damages, and if the companies claimed that the stuff was safe to spray on people, then the Government could sue the companies to recoup the losses.

but that's the whole point the companies IE dow corning ARE the ones being sued

[lasersailor184]

Fine.  Vietnam, completely convert to a Democracy or Republic, then we'll talk.



Until then, you can piss off.

[Fishu]

It's never who did more, it's always bad.

The attitude that US should not be seen as responsible of war crimes just because the other side is accused of doing more, is simply said stupid and naive thinking.

I've never claimed of all of US GI's doing so, even though Gunslinger seems to have some trouble understanding it.

The fact is there were (and still are!) US troops and people in the goverment responsible of war crimes, not whether it was none or all of them.

Theres no comparison to the enemy, war crime is always a war crime and the responsible people are guilty of a war crime, regardless was there 1000 or 100000 war criminals on the other side.

[mrblack]

I think they need to point there little fingers up to there north!

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Fishu
How about bombing of cambodia, that whatever special force team doing attrocities against suspected VC's...  butchering couple of villages....

US GI's werent any G.I holy mary's there either.
US commited SEVERAL war crimes in vietnam.

and

The attitude that US should not be seen as responsible of war crimes just because the other side is accused of doing more, is simply said stupid and naive thinking.

I never acused u of anything.  I just get really tired of GIs being veiwed as baby killers and VC/NVA being portrayed as saints.  That has allways been the general attitude of librals since the war.

Now, my question should be this.....why should the US (GOVT/CORP.) be expected to pay a dime to a country for hanus acts and antrocities when the same country also commited hanus attrocities?

Just brings to mind those in glass houses.

I'm not saying either country's hands are clean.  I'm just tired of the slanted view on-sided view.

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by Fishu
It's never who did more, it's always bad.

The attitude that US should not be seen as responsible of war crimes just because the other side is accused of doing more, is simply said stupid and naive thinking.

I've never claimed of all of US GI's doing so, even though Gunslinger seems to have some trouble understanding it.

The fact is there were (and still are!) US troops and people in the goverment responsible of war crimes, not whether it was none or all of them.

Theres no comparison to the enemy, war crime is always a war crime and the responsible people are guilty of a war crime, regardless was there 1000 or 100000 war criminals on the other side.

Fishu you are missing the point.  They are suing the US companies.  Why aren't they suing their own people, who did much more damage to the South than the US ever did in the North?  If they are suing a company it should be Kalashnikov or Simonov or Norinco.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Now, my question should be this.....why should the US (GOVT/CORP.) be expected to pay a dime to a country for hanus acts and antrocities when the same country also commited hanus attrocities?

I've read the article quite fast, but isn't the lawsuit filled in the US  and so it will be judged with your legal system ?

If so be very affraid

[Fishu]

Gunslinger,

And im tired when people goes to generalize what I say.
I didn't either say ANYTHING at all about NVA's, so that was all your imagination to even distantly think I viewed them as saints or anything distant to that.
Other thing is when they put down attrocities by their own country by claiming "hey, they did it thousand times more!", that is so 'responsible' way to approach it.. makes sometimes wonder do they allow it in the future if this is the answer. (not like I too much care but.. guantamo? )

I don't like communism per se.
Neither did my grandpa or his father.

I don't even have to go through all the things that communism has caused, since most here anyway knows it all already..

Some just doesnt seem to know that US has commited war crimes, which were just as bad...?
It's never who does more... it is just an excuse to accuse the other side of doing more.
Responsibility should be carried and learn not to accept it in the future.
Thats the only way we'll get better... not the excuses.

Every case of attrocity is one too many, that is the point.

[Habu]

The US did not bomb Cambodia, they bombed the camps vehicle depots and supply bases in Cambodia that the NVA were using to supply South Viet Nam. The NVA did not respect borders and used the absurb rules of conduct to their advantage every chance they could.

The NVA and Viet Cong commited more attrocities in a day than the US forces did in the war. If a pilot was shot down and caught in the south the NVA would build a bamboo cage and make the prisoner carry it on his back the whole march back to the north. They would starve him and not allow him to bath so they could showcase the pathetic figure in rags to all the villages they passed on the long march. Showing ho much superior they were over the US people. At night they would put him in the cage he was forced to carry.

Anyone who takes the NVA side in this thread is just a total idiot who has no clue. The US were fighting the Russians and Chinese in Viet Nam. The north was every bit a corrupt as the south. The US action in Viet Nam stopped the spread of communism in Indonesia and Malaysia and Brunei all of which had very active Communist movements at that time.

By tieing up all the resources of Russia and China in Viet Nam the local governments of those countries could put down the movements and did very effectively.

Furthermore if the US had been less worried about civilain casulties and world opinion they could have ended the war in 1967 or 68. All they had to do was close the supply lines in the north by mineing the harbours and bombing all rail lines and roads into China. Instead they tried to leave the north alone and negotiate an end to the war. Big mistake and I am sure they would not do that again.

[lasersailor184]

Fishu you are missing the point. They are suing the US companies. Why aren't they suing their own people, who did much more damage to the South than the US ever did in the North? If they are suing a company it should be Kalashnikov or Simonov or Norinco.

Don't make this generalization.


The NVA and VC would ruin entire towns even if one person was a closet anti communist.  That's north **AND** south.  There were no borders to these people.

[mrblack]

DO NOT condem the very young men who for the most part were drafted and did not want to be there either!

I can assure you they would have been home with there girlfriends at the drive in than arse deep in mud and death.

to all those who made it home and those who are still there
Never forget the MIA.

[-tronski-]

Holocaust victims sued IBM... slave labourers sued german companies...the japanese govt. paid compenstation to allied pows...

so sueing a govt/company for conduct in wartime is hardly new

 Tronsky

[Fishu]

Originally posted by Habu
The US did not bomb Cambodia, they bombed the camps vehicle depots and supply bases in Cambodia that the NVA were using to supply South Viet Nam. The NVA did not respect borders and used the absurb rules of conduct to their advantage every chance they could.

Okey.. I get it, there were a whole city full of unarmed NVAs in cambodia