The US today decided to begin relations with Vietnam today. 
What do you think about this?

11 responses total.

It's about time.

Actually, Clinton's only lifted the trade ban.  He has not started
normal diplomatic relations.

 Yeah!  Someone ought to buy Jim a newspaper every once in a while.

   I heard that from ABC news, and yes tim I do buy a Free Press once
in a while, and read it.

Veterans groups are not pleased. They think this will lower their leverage
to get info on MIAs from Vietnam. I do not subscribe to this theory, though.

The stuff about MIAs is bunk.  Only wishful thinking could lead to the
conclusion that Vietnam is still holding live prisoners captured twenty
or thirty years ago.  Nor is there any reason for them to withhold any
remains or trinkets (e.g., dog tags) that they might know about.  This
issue has been exploited by cynical opportunists for far too long.

I agree.

I heard that American businesses may have benefited from the boycott.
This is because other countries' corporations have entered Vietnam
earlier and had significant difficulties to overcome.
This was reported on a business program on TV.
They said that the American businesses stepping in now are in
a position to learn from the others' mistakes at much less cost to us.

 Until we have proof that there aren't any live POWs, I hope that we'll
continue to operate with the belief that it is possible, despite 'knowledge'
posessed by certain liberal %$#*&s like Lawrence Kestenbaum (who in my
opinion probably would have fleed to Canada during the draft).

The opening of trade with Vietnam provides access to a fertile market already
being expoited by other nations.   IMO there logical reason for the Veitnamese
to continue to hold POWs from our involvement there (read that "there is no
logical reason") or for them to hide any info they might actually know about
referring to same.   The only thing that might actually be happening (again
IMO) and this is rather farfetched, but possible i suppose, is that there is
some underhanded effort to keep opposition to trade with Vietnam active in the
USA in order to provide the Asian nations with an economic advantage over us.
        This implies a conspiracy of east Asian nations including Vietnam and
the more developed countries of Japan, China, and Korea.  Again, I suspect
that this is a farfetched idea, but given the past history of east Asian
economic politics, it is not impossible.
        PS:  tnt, please try to keep this above the level of personal attacks,
it is intended as an open forum for discussion and we can all derive much more
out of it if we keep it polite.  Thanks!

 Perhaps you interpreted my %$#*& to be worse than it was (on second thought,
I doubt that's possible...).

        As long as there's even a minute chance (and there is) that there might
be U.S. troops still in captivity over there, I will continue to quickly
& forcefully challenge people like Kestenbaum (& others, for example I recall
that Steve Andre thinks the same way) who for whatever reason have erased
that possibility from their conscience.

        You said "there is no logical reason" that Vietnam/Laos would still 
hold troops.  There are tons of hole in your broad statement.  Unless you're
willing to share your broad knowledge of the topic, I think you mean to say
that YOU can't think of any logical reason...  That's fine, neither can I.

        Yet if you spent any time watching the Congressional hearings on the
POW/MIA issue last year on CSPAN, you'd know that the issue is not closed,
and as long as there is the possibility that some of our soldiers who 
enlisted or were drafted, and carried out the orders of our elected
leadership, & who were lost/captured/abandoned over there might still havbea
beating hearts, we must operate on the belief that some --at least one--
ARE alive!

        Can you imagine Fire Chief Kestenbaum, just pulling up at the scene of
a major disaster with the ambulances saying "There's no way anyone could
still be alive!"  Unfortunately, I can. Quite vividly.   

  There always has to be a time for an end to come. I believe that it is 
time to go on, and not dwell on the past. If more MIA's and POW's are
found as a result of this relation then the US has moved in the correct
direction. Change is essential in all manner of things, and I believe this
is a healthy step in the right direction.
  In other words, you catch more flies with honey than you will with
vinegar. Friendly relations make for a happier world.

  I hope that President Clinton will do the same with Cuba. I don't see
why an embargo should go on, because frankly it is hurting the wrong people.
Do you realize that the USA is the only nation that has an embargo against
Cuba? The dollar is legal there, so why shouldn't we establish normal relations
and move on. War is a very old idea that I wish would die off.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss