Tuba, can you be more specific, please?

The BBQ Pit
1

Tuba has apparently decided to close the Scylla thread. Not, in my opinion, for a legitimate reason, but because the topic appears simply to offend her. Fine–your board, your prerogative. Nothing I can do about it. But I have both two comments and a question regarding your post announcing the closing, which was:

The comments concerns the sentences in the middle. “You can’t understand, you weren’t there” and “If you weren’t there, you can’t criticize” are really hallmarks of a very weak argument. By those standards, half of the threads in Great Debates are so much pissing in the wind, as they involve criticism of high-level government decisions (of which, to my knowledge, no posters are involved) and discussion of historical events, many of them in the distant past. Furthermore, despite the apparent widespread belief in my stupidity, I have spent a lot of time around people from that generation (bucketful of irony: my father is now married to a dyed-in-the-wool ex-hippie war protestor) and am more than capable of developing a reasonable understanding of what it was like. As are most intelligent people. So, in short, that dog simply don’t hunt.

The other comment is that running to Canada or otherwise unlawfully or unethically avoiding the draft wasn’t “facing a difficult decision.” It was avoiding a difficult decision. The difficult decision was “Honor my draft notice and go to Vietnam, or go to jail for being a draft dodger.”

My question is, what exactly does, “Don’t fight like this again on this subject on this board” mean? Any thread about Vietnam – goals, the draft. strategy, history, whatever – is almost bound to involve people with (to put it gently) diametrically opposed opinions. And opinions are bound to be strong, in ways that they often aren’t on other topics. You know me, and you know I’m neither a right-winger nor a hawk, but I have very definite opinions on Vietnam and draft dodgers. At what point – after crossing what line – am I fighting “like this?”

It’s my opinion that that creates an unnecessarily vague standard, and an aribtrary one at that. When I’ve inquired in the past about “consistent standards” to help avoid bannings, I’ve been told that it’s difficult to create a standard that will apply across the board. Well, here you appear to be telling us there’s a standard for Vietnam threads, so do you mind telling us what it actually is?

2

PLD:

I don’t think it’s a question about standards, or topic.

Within the pit, hostilities can flare and often get worked out. At other times, any hope of a constructive conclusion becomes unlikely, and the thread simply becomes a thing with no other purpose but to hurt those involved as much as possible.

I’d hypothesize that it was closed due to extreme ugliness.

Similarly, I decided not to discuss my experiences as a young boy while my father served, as I had thought the thread so dirty I didn’t want to treat those memories in that fashion.

And, I found your relation of you and your family’s experiences to be more to be moving and succinct, and didn’t wish to be redundant or sully or confuse them.

Again, I’d guess it’s the ugliness, not the subject matter, and while my opinion doesn’t matter I’m glad Tuba made the choice to do so, and think it was appropriate.

3

Scylla is correct. The thread was really ugly, with no resolution in sight.

Anytime you have anyone compared to the Werhmacht, things are bound to roll right downhill.

Vietnam is still, after all these years, a very hot button issue. Phil, while you are entitled to have your views and certainly your family has made the ultimate sacrifice for this country, that does not entitle you to be nasty towards other people who made other choices. They have their reasons too.

You may consider it as weak an argument as you like but I don’t think you can truly understand the choices and the times if you haven’t had to live though it your own self. It’s incredibly easy to come along after and say what you would have said or done different, you don’t know.

Someday, somehow, that war’s going to be over. Everyone that lived through those times carries memories and scars . . . some still quite painful. It’s not productive to open up these old wounds or to try to inflict new ones.

Like most everything else in the whole wide world we can debate and discuss and even argue damn near all there is right here on this board, but we’re not going to fight or refight Vietnam here if you can’t be civil about it. There’s limits to everything, dammit.

your humble TubaDiva
Administrator

4

Well, I’ll simply state for the record that I disagree. I thought, given the level of what often occurs in the Pit, that thread was remarkably civil. Heated? Un-stinkin’-doubtedly. Strong-willed? You bet. A lot less profane, though – at least on my end – than it had the potential to be; and while there was obvious rhetoric being flung about, points were being addressed, too. I agree that there was not going to be a resolution, per se – I am not in a position to have my mind changed on the topic of draft dodgers – but that does not mean that it is not in some way useful for people like me and people like elucidator to be able to speak their minds on the subject. Frankly, it isn’t something I get to talk about often in my life, and I found it liberating to be able to do so.

I also can’t help but think (and this is nothing but pure, unadulterated paranoid speculation on my part) that the thread is being closed in part because I, and the people who appeared to be agreeing with me, are less than convinced about the noble intent of protestors and draft dodgers.

In any case, if you were alive during that time, or know someone who was, are left-wing, right-wing, protestor, veteran, or whatever, I urge you all to visit the Wall. You will never be the same again, I promise you.

5

There’s a lot I’d like to say, but I’m struggling to follow Tubadiva’s strictures not to discuss the war. I can see that it is deeply personal for everyone in the thread but me. My father’s war was Korea, not Vietnam, and I had no relative lost in the war. I was only a child, so I was not even aware of the issues at the time. I was too busy fingerpainting and taking naptime to protest.

I will say that protesting the government’s policies can be the highest form of patriotism, so long as it’s done by the loyal opposition.

and FTR, Elucidator was the one who invoked Godwin’s Law, not PLD.

6

Phil, you’re exactly right. There’s nothing at all difficult about “Leave my family and my life because I can’t live in a country that would support such an unjust war, or stay in the country, refuse to fight, and be jailed unjustly.”

There’s nothing difficult about that decision at all.

7

Um, not to nit pick or anything, but wasn’t this thread closed?

8

I agree with Phil, I was around during that time period and I am a veteran. The Wall has the names of several of my childhood friends, relatives and service buddies etched into it. It is indeed moving to visit the Wall. I could share stories about those times but this is not the time nor the place. I don’t know if there ever will be a time or a place.

I don’t care if someone avoided the draft or serving their country by whatever means. Each and everyone of us must make decisions daily and then we must live with ourselves after making those decisions. I can however, retain my intense disgust of Jane Fonda. I know that harboring a feeling like that is wrong, not good for me and a sin, but I can’t help it.

9

And for the record: at no point, by any stretch of the imagination, did I compare our troops with Nazis. I posed the question: if a patriot is to place his nation above any other consideration, then a German would, by that reasoning, be compelled to enlist in the Wehrmacht. The quote, in its entirety, reads as follows:

Only the most willful misreading will interpret that as comparing the US troops to Nazis. It is simply too obnoxious an inference to allow to stand without challenge.

Beyond that, I am content that the matter be closed.

10

OK, your position has been acknowledged and validated - must you retort with a back-handed slam against Tuba, and, in a broader sense, anti-war protesters?

Nice way to get around the closed thread. IMHO, I’d say you owe Tuba an apology for assigning spurious motives to her (i.e., censorship) when she already told you why she closed it.

Esprix

11

Well, I’ll tell you what, Esprix. You’re a real nice guy and all, and I’ve never had a beef with you before, but considering that:

  1. If my feelings concerning protestors are not manifestly clear by now, then I’ve done a piss-poor job of expressing myself, and the sentence you quoted really doesn’t make a lot of difference, and

  2. Stating explicitly that my statement is “pure, unadulterated paranoid speculation” is a far cry from “assigning spurious motives,” unless you’re about to accuse me of being a liar or disingenuous about the matter, and

  3. Tuba is a big girl and can obviously take care of herself if she feels offended, and has furthermore known me as a poster since the AOL days and has my e-mail address,

U can take your HO and insert it straight into your A.

I started this thread not to “get around” the closed thread, but because I felt that it was rather unlike Tuba to simultaneously close the thread and appear to argue against my points without allowing a response–if you’re going to close it, close it, and if you’re going to argue, argue; and because, as I stated in the OP (you read it, right?), I wanted clarification as to what “fighting in this way” means.

Quite honestly, given your Pit history and your propensity for dragging people here, and the fact that I rarely start Pit threads about other posters, I can’t imagine why you thought your statement here was a reasonable one. If you have a problem with that, Esprix, take it to my e-mail, because I am not going to get in a public pissing match with you.

12

Speaking as a combat veteran, (Desert Storm, the son of a combat veteran, (Korea and Vietnam), the grandson of a combat veteran, (WWII), and the nephew of uncles in all of the above, I’ve always felt and still believe to this day that to dodge the draft by leaving our Country should mean that you are never allowed back.

After all, if someone is not willing to stand up and serve their Country, then why would they bother to live here?

I apologize in advance if this seems to be a carry over from the closed thread. I don’t believe it is, but truly believe that all citizens should serve mandatory terms of some form of Federal service, be it Military or Civilian such as the Peace Corps or whatever. To blatantly refuse to do so is a slap in the face of every single veteran that ever served in any branch of the Service in any war.

Xploder

13

You know, I may be the only person over 30 in America who feels completely untouched by the Vietnam war.

No one in my family served, no one I know was hurt (if they were killed I obviously wouldn’t be aware of them), my mom protested against the war (evidently with me on hip, but I don’t recall it) but never got hurt or anything.

Frankly, I’m just as glad to leave the whole thing behind me.

14

Much as I hate to criticize Tuba, agree with Phil. I have nothing but respect for Tuba, but if you’re moderating then moderate, or if you’re commenting then comment. But to comment in a way that obviously goes against one side and not the other – “you don’t have the right to criticize, you don’t understand it” – and then closing the thread without giving the side you’re chastizing a chance to respond – it seems to me to be unfair. Surely you can just say, “this is getting too hot and I see no prospect for resolution, so this thread is closed”?

Leaving aside the fact that I totally disagree with the idea that no person who wasn’t “there” (wherever “there” is) could possibly understand it, as well as the idea that only those who have personally faced a difficult choice have the right to criticize it, such statements seem to me to be legitimate parts of an ongoing discussion, but not legitimate parting shots when closing a thread for – presumably – legitimate moderating reasons (meaning, reasons other than “I disagree with you” or “I don’t like this subject.”)

And I certainly hope that “don’t fight like this on this subject on this board” doesn’t mean that Vietnam is off limits as a topic. If such varied and hot topics as Judaism, Christianity, abortion, and gun control can be subject to rigorous discussion and, yes, flaming, then Vietnam should be as well.

This is one of the reasons I think the mods should clearly differentiate when they’re wearing their moderator hats and their poster hats. Because if you don’t, it can sure look like you’re closing a thread just because you didn’t like it.

15

I heard of cave paintings in France so fragile that if they are exposed to the light of day, they will be destroyed and all their meaning lost.

16

What?

17

Yeah, SCYLLA, but they’re really, really old, simplistic, and done by people with an underdeveloped frontal brain. :slight_smile:

18

Penguins.

19

Not…not the PENGUINS again!!!

AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

20

Jodi:

I’m glad to see that thing gone (bet you’ll never guess why.)

Why look a gift horse in the mouth?

(BTW. Sorry about the other thread.)