Thursday, May 01, 2008

Blog #21 - Do It Yourself, Part 2

Pick one of the following blogs and give a full, detailed and well-thought out answer. As usual, you can't pick your own, and your answer must be a minimum of 150 words.

1. Do you think that the U.S. would have been any safer w/o fighting the Vietnam War? Was it really worth it? Why or why not? - Lorne, Ben, Ryan B., Bethany, Jourdan, Tyler, Megan W., Jason S.,

2. When public support is so low for a war (Vietnam / Iraq), why did/do we continue to fight that war? - Ally R.

3. With many of the same characteristics as the Vietnam War, do you think that the Iraq War will end the same way or differently? Why? - Christy, Ben, Kelsey, TJ, Robbie L., Alex D., Matt Ba.,

4. Why doesn't the media show us the reality of wars? Should they show us the reality of what's going on in Iraq? - Emily C., Nicole, Michael G., Jessica,

5. How would life (our future) be different today if there was a draft like in Vietnam? Would you enlist, skip out on the draft, or allow yourself to be drafted? Why? - Trevor, Andrew, Claire, Derek M., TJ, Mollie,

6. Do you think it is disloyalty to America if the citizens don't support the troops who are fighting the war? Why or why not? - Raekeshia

7. Do you think the chemical nicknamed Agent Orange was appropriate to use considering the destruction and casualties? Why or why not? - Ian, Fred,

8. Do you think President George H.W. Bush should have gone after Saddam Hussein and his army after freeing Kuwait in 1991? Why or why not? - Rob G., Bethany, TJ, Emma,

9. With over 4,000 soldiers killed and 30,000+ injured from the war in Iraq, besides pulling out the troops, what other solutions are there to stop more Americans from being killed in Iraq? Is there another alternative to pulling out of Iraq? - Angelina

10. If you were on the grand jury in the Kent State shooting case, how would you have voted? Why? - Sarah

11. Given that there are so many similarities between the Vietnam and Iraq wars, why haven't our leaders learned from history? How would you do things differently if you were president? - Sarah, Amber, Jacob T., Jessica,

12. How do you feel about our current foreign policy: do you feel our priorities are out of whack or should we be able to look out for ourselves first? Is there another alternative? - Alexandra, Jacob T.,

13. Should Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara have spoken up sooner about our misguided Vietnam policy than he did? - Paul, Matt Ba., Jessica,

14. Would you have been a protester during the Vietnam War? Why or why not? - Marin, Nikita, Tyler H., Jason S., Megan W.,

15. Do you think the student protests influenced America's decision to leave Vietnam? Why or why not? - Stefan

16. Why didn't more nations support us when we went into the Persian Gulf the second time in 2003? - Stefan

17. Should the American people be able to vote against the President's decisions during war time? Why or why not? - Rob S.,

18. Who was to blame for the Kent State shootings: the National Guard, the students, or someone else? What other ways could this have been handled? - numerous students

19.

52 comments:

Anonymous said...

In the case of the Kent State shootings, blame cannot be placed individually on one person or group of people. When you examine the events that took place on that day, one can realize how mostly everybody involved is at fault. One of the groups who can be blamed is the Ohio National Guard, who fired shots and tear gas into the protestors. The Ohio National Guard had a policy of handling and possibly using loaded weapons to control civil disorders. The shootings could have been avoided without this policy. The Ohio National Guard also said that they fired because they were outnumbered and they saw a sniper (which was never proven) but the shootings still could have been handled differently. Another thing you can blame is the schools leniency when it comes to events such as protests. Even though these two groups were at fault, I would place most of the blame on the protestors. The protestors were rowdy. During that week they had burned down the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps building and there had been tons of looting. When the guards told them to stop protesting it was essential for them to listen to the guards. This could have been handled better if the National Guard didn’t use weapons, and the students listened. Instead of using weapons, the National Guard could have gone in and made immediate arrests of people.

Jacob Trunsky
4th hour

Anonymous said...

Emily C
2nd Hour

6. Do you think it is disloyalty to America if the citizens don't support the troops who are fighting the war? Why or why not? -

The America citizens should support the troops, but they can also oppose the war. The troops are risking their lives for this country. The troops are protecting and fighting for the country and their lives, and they should be supported for that. The American people should be able to oppose the war and support the troops at the same time. People can protest against the war, even while supporting the troops. The president and the government are the people who are sending the troops over seas. The government and the president are prolonging the war. The American citizens want the troops to come home to be safe and health. People want the war to end, but every day the troops are dying. I think if the citizens do not support the troops their being disloyal to America. The troops need everyone’s support and help to keep America free and to stop the terrorist in the world.

Anonymous said...

11. Given that there are so many similarities between the Vietnam and Iraq wars, why haven't our leaders learned from history? How would you do things differently if you were president? - Sarah, Amber, Jacob T., Jessica

One reason our leaders haven’t learned from history is because they don’t pay attention to it. They say that you can repeat the past but that is what we are doing right now. Right now we are in a war that we don’t want to be in and if we don’t end it there may be another large protest against it; and this time it might be worse. Another reason that our present leader hasn’t learned from this and is in the war, is not only because of 9/11, but because he wants revenge on his father’s behalf. And you can’t cause your own personal problems to interfere in a great problem like this and cost people’s lives. And like I said before, you can’t understand the future if you pay attention to the past. If I was president I would listen to what the people want and if the majority wants to end the war I would end it.

Nikita C
4th hour

Anonymous said...

I think it is definitely disloyalty to America if people don’t support the troops fighting the war in Iraq. Not supporting the troops is unacceptable and inexcusable. Part of what makes our country so unique is the fact that we are united and accepting of everyone, and our soldiers are no exception. Regardless of their opinion about whether the war is ethical or not, support for the troops is extremely important. Our support and care for our troops is what keeps them going everyday. If you were fighting for your nation and realized that your own people are not behind you one hundred percent, would you have much motivation to continue? Our soldiers work extremely hard every day to accomplish their goals, but they can’t do it alone. Our efforts make all the difference when it comes to how much more time it will take to bring the troops home.

Claire Hayes
2nd hour

Anonymous said...

Do you think the student protests influenced America's decision to leave Vietnam? Why or why not?
I believe student protests did influence America’s decision to leave Vietnam. If it wasn’t for the protests, the government would not have known that the majority of the people did not want to fight this war. The government did not want to leave Vietnam but the protesters let them know how they felt about the war. If people did not protest the government would have thought the American people did not care or they were supporting the war. We might have even won the war if it was not for the protestors causing us to leave early. But that would have added at least a couple more years to the war. If the students were protesting it showed that the people fighting for America were not motivated to fight which would hurt our chances of success in Vietnam. This is how the student protest affected America’s decision to leave Vietnam.
robert g 5th

Anonymous said...

18. The protest at Kent state was about Nixon’s announcement at about invading Cambodia. Students at Kent State apposed Nixon’s decision and formed a protest. The national guard interpreted there protest b them saying that they hear a snippier shot in the crowd. The national guard wounded 9 people and killed 4 people, most of them weren’t even apart of the protest they were merely walking to class or observing it from afar. I don’t know who to blame for the protest since I wasn’t there I don’t know who to blame. The facts point to the national guard, but at the same time they only stated shooting because they said they heard a sniper shot but know sniper was ever found or any bullets from the sniper were found either.

kathy kakoz
2nd hour

Anonymous said...

3. With many of the same characteristics as the Vietnam War, do you think that the Iraq War will end the same way or differently? Why? - Christy, Ben, Kelsey, TJ, Robbie L., Alex D., Matt Ba.,

Right now, it is hard to tell when or how the Iraq war is going to end, but I can see it going in the same direction as the war with Vietnam did. During the Vietnam war, many people in America did not support the war. That was one of the reasons why we pulled out of Vietnam. The same thing is happening right now. A lot of American citizens don’t agree with the war in Iraq, and they want American troops to come back home. This could lead to the president doing the same thing that the president did during Vietnam: withdraw from the war. Also, it is possible that the effects of withdrawing with be similar. Once America had left Vietnam, South Vietnam was taken over by the communists because of the south’s weak resistance. The same thing could happen with Iraq. It is likely that Iraq still will not be united, and will be very weak if America just pulls out of the war. This will allow Al Queda and other groups like it to take over Iraq, just like South Vietnam was taken over. The beginning and middle of the two wars are very similar; it’s possible that the end of the wars will also be alike.

Bethany Slon
5th hour

Anonymous said...

3. With many of the same characteristics as the Vietnam War, do you think that the Iraq War will end the same way or differently? Why?

I think that the Iraq war will not end the same way as the Vietnam War. There are some of the same characteristics as the Vietnam War. But there are also differences between them.
Differences that set the two wars apart from one another. Such as the number of casualties in Vietnam was tremendous but the Iraq war had just a fraction of that. This would then make it easier to send troops knowing that they wouldn't come back in body bags for almost every soldier. Another is that, in Iraq we have put only volunteer forces out to defend our country instead of a draft. So that shows that there are more Americans committed to fight for the cause. To fight for the cause of saving Iraq, and ridding that section of the middle east of terrorism. So with some of these differences it makes it easier to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Where as in Vietnam, there was no positive outcome to be found. So I believe that in the end the Iraq war will take a completely different course than the one in Vietnam. One with an outcome that will be positive and productive.

Ben Tredwell
5th

Anonymous said...

When public support is so low for a war (Vietnam / Iraq), why did/do we continue to fight that war?

With public support so low for a war sometimes it is necessary to keep fighting that war. We have been in Iraq for a long time now and the public support for our troops being there has only gone down. There have been around 4,000 soldiers killed and 30,000+ injured during our invasion and eventual takeover of Saddam and Iraq. However if we were to just leave Iraq right now it would most likely be disastrous and equivalent to taking many steps backwards. I think in both wars as much as we wished the war was going to be over there is the threat that if you pull out, the whole nation will collapse, you will be left with an even bigger problem, and all the troops who died for the cause will have died for no reason. There is still a reason to be in the war, it is just not the answer most of us are looking for.
Kelsey Kaline
5th

Anonymous said...

4. I think the media doesn’t show us the reality of wars because they don’t want us to see what is behind doors. During the war on the news, you see bombings, killings, and injuries like its nothing new. However what we don’t see is maybe someone’s life being saved or something positive about the war (although that’s kind of hard to find) there has to be something that isn’t so dark and depressing. By them only showing us those things, it makes us scared and worried for our country. I think they should show us the reality of what is going on in Iraq because we should be able to see what our friends or relatives are out there fighting for. By showing us different information, it would also give us another aspect of the war. Potentially, it could change people’s opinions if they had a little bit of reality of what is going on.

Melanie Shaw
4th hour

Anonymous said...

18. Who was to blame for the Kent State shootings: the National Guard, the students, or someone else? What other ways could this have been handled?

1970 was a nasty year for the United States and for the Vietnam War, so it is not surprising that an event of this magnitude occurred. Starting back from the end of 1969, the My Lai Massacre was exposed, the draft was instituted, and Nixon, on April 30, 1970, announced that they were going to invade Cambodia. All of these events led to one college led demonstrations on campuses protesting not only the war itself, but the draft for the war that they didn’t believe in. Tensions were extremely high in Ohio, more specifically in Kent State, where the governor of Ohio sent about 1,000 National Guardsmen to help keep peace. So, when I look back on this situation, to see who really should be blamed for the shootings that took place, I don’t think it’s possible. There were so many things happening at once: the students were egging on the guardsmen, the guardsmen were using tear gas against the students; it’s no wonder that people were killed. In the end, you could say that it was the students fault for being disloyal and asking for brutality; you could say it was the guards fault for firing their weapons on unarmed protestors; you could say that it was the governments fault for creating public disapproval and tension by invading Cambodia, and instituting the draft. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter whose fault it was; what really matters is that we never let this happen ever again.

Tyler Friedman
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

2. When public support is so low for a war (Vietnam / Iraq), why did/do we continue to fight that war? - Ally R.

I think that this is a very good question. In times like these when 67% of people around the world think they we should leave Iraq why don’t we? Personally I think its all about how The United States likes to present itself. We can’t accept not being successful. I think that’s why we won’t leave Iraq now. I mean losing in Vietnam was a big deal to America and I think that the government thinks that if we hold on long enough we can come out looking like heroes. I just think that we need to be able to recognize when our presence stops helping and starts hurting. I think that we stayed in Vietnam for so long because we didn’t want to disappoint American citizens. I think that the government felt like they had to prove to their people that we were still invincible and still in control. But what I’m saying is why do we have to be invincible? I think the quality of our country should be based on something other than our war record.

5th Hour
Sarah

Anonymous said...

1. I think that the U.S. would have been much safer without fighting the Vietnam War. Over 60,000 lives were lost for nothing. When the war ended it was considered our first loss, and are goal was not met; to end communism in Vietnam for the south, but right when we left they were taken over by the north and brought back into communism. Even if the war had been a victory in the end I would still say it was not worth it. Too many lives were sacrificed for something that did not affect the United States enough to take as big of a role in the war as we did. Entire classes of students were killed in the war because soldiers were being sent in with no chance of survival because of the guerilla tactics used by the Viet Cong. It is one mistake that should never be made again, and we must learn from the war so that we can prevent something like it from happening again.
Paul Sidlosky
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

6. I think that the citizens of America should be able to have their own opinion of the war. I don’t think that makes them disloyal to American, but not supporting the troops is being disloyal to the country. Even if you don’t support the war, you should still support the people in Iraq that are dying for you. Think of all the families that have loved ones in Iraq, you should support them. They might not even support the war, but they still support the soldiers that are fighting. Plus many of the soldiers may have supported the war in the beginning, and may dislike it just as much as anyone now, but they can’t do anything about it now. It’s not the troops fault that we are in this war, so why should you not support them. There could be men there fighting for something that they no longer believe in.

Christy Slowinski
2 hour

Anonymous said...

Nicole Niezgocki
2nd hour

Our life today, would be different if there was a Vietnam draft by we could not look back and see the great riot in chicago. The older people of the time would not think the teens of the age were trying to skip on their fate and run out on their country. There would have most-likely been a riot about the draft, and people might have gotten even madder. When I think about it, I would allow my self to be drafted, just so I wouldn't have to move away from my home, family, and friends. If I did happen to get drafted, I would run, run out of reach so I wouldn't have to fight for something that I think is wrong. I would like to stay where I grew up, but if worse comes to worse, then I would move away. The only problem with running, is that once you leave and skip the draft, you can't come back. You have to stay where you re-located yourself.

Anonymous said...

5. How would life (our future) be different today if there was a draft like in Vietnam? Would you enlist, skip out on the draft, or allow yourself to be drafted? Why?

Life would be much different if there was a draft today. Kids just out of high school would have to worry about being sent to fight a war that they might not believe in. There would be protests across the nation for the already unpopular war and the draft. In the end, I think a draft would bring an end to the war. People let the war keep going because it doesn’t directly affect them (other than economically). Once people are put in danger by the draft then they will start to oppose the war more openly. The government would not be able to continue a war with such widespread disapproval. If I was drafted I would refuse to fight. I’m not sure how the system works, but if I could get some sort of deferment for my beliefs I would do that. If that wasn’t an option I would move to Canada. I wouldn’t want to be a part of a country that makes me fight in a war I don’t believe in.

Stefan Rush
4th Hour

Anonymous said...

Do you think the student protests influenced America's decision to leave Vietnam? Why or why not?

There were reasons for staying in Vietnam or leaving. The reasons for staying in Vietnam were the domino theory, people thought it was a noble objective protecting Vietnam. People opposed the war because it was killing Vietnamese civilians, the U.S. didn’t follow their objective, and people were morally opposed the war. I don’t believe the protesting made a difference in ending the war earlier. The protestors showed the government that there was no support for the war. That politicians were afraid of being voted out of office by the people who were against the war. That collage students soldiers were not willing to give up their life. For a cause they did not believe in music, and protests were used to get the U.S. out of the war. When the government felt support was gone.

Justin Laffer
5th

Anonymous said...

7. Do you think the chemical nicknamed Agent Orange was appropriate to use considering the destruction and casualties? Why or why not? - Ian, Fred


Chemical warfare is frowned upon all over the world and mostly here in the US, but what is so trouble ling is that a nation that attempts to reinforce this matter so much, then contradicts itself by using them in Vietnam. Chemical Orange not only showed the dangers and long term effects of chemical warfare but it also highlighted the major controversial effects chemical warfare can have on a nation. To back up this immense train of thought, take the rainforests that were obliterated. In a nutshell, here is how we pretty much screwed over everything we stand for. The Americans came into Vietnam and burned down there forests because we couldn’t see. Then because we used toxic chemicals to burn all of the leaves and everyone either died, got cancer, or was severely angered with the US. The moral of the story? All of this could have been avoided if we had never used chemical warfare to begin with. A toxic chemical is never appropriate to use no matter what the circumstance. Especially when your country frowns upon it so much.
-Angelina Bertoni 5th

Anonymous said...

QUESTION 18

I think the government was to blame for the Kent State shootings. It’s a broad answer but there wasn’t one person who chose to fight the war, there had to be a few in order for the attacks to happen. The government knows that there are going to be protestors for every problem they have to deal with, and this just happened to be one of the worst protests. I think that the National Guard was sent in correctly, but they had no right to fire at people. If they wanted to fire into the sky, go ahead that might have scared people. The fact that they actually killed human beings is ridiculous. They were getting just as out of hand as the protesters were and hopefully the United States has learned from this. The shootings at Kent State remind me of the horrific police beatings that occurred when hippies protested the Vietnam War. The government needs to take this question into consideration, what are we doing wrong as a country if our national forces are loosing the lives they should be saving?

MOLLIE YARSIKE/5th

Anonymous said...

#4 I think that the media doesn’t show the public all the things that are really happening in Iraq because they are trying to protect us and reduce protesting. In Vietnam, the public was briefed 24-7 about the current status of the war. They were also informed about the terrible parts that the media wouldn’t normally show. Because the public knew the truth about the war, protesters had a much bigger impact. We all know how the protesting turned out. Iraq has many similarities with Vietnam. This means it could possibly turn out the same way. This means people will protest it the same way as Vietnam, and people are. I think since history is repeating, the media doesn’t want to let it repeat. I think they think if they show all the events in Iraq, then the protesters will go and create riots like before. Also, the government might be telling the media to conceal the information for the same reason, they don’t want to upset people, make panic, or riots.

Rob Salton
4th

Anonymous said...

17) Yes I believe that the people of America should be able to vote against the president's decision during war time. It is the voice of the people and the war concerns them too. technically it is them fighting in the war (soldiers) and not the president. Even though people can choose to fight in the war or not. The majority should make the decision. Since during the time most of the people were for the war it seemed like the thing to do for the president but once the opinion about the war changed the president should of did something about it. It isn’t our job to watch over other nations. Only if it really concerns us should we ever get into it. Overall Americans should have the right to vote against the presidents decision. Its all of America that gets involved in the war not just the president.
Nick Theisen
4th hour

Anonymous said...

14. Would you have been a protester during the Vietnam War? Why or why not?

There was a lot of support and hatred toward the Vietnam War. But it was mostly hatred toward the war, and most of the attention went toward the protesters because of the events that happened. Events like the Chicago riots. If was alive during that time I probably would have been a protester in some way, because I think the Vietnam War was a bad idea. I would try to protest it in a peaceful way. I think the war was a mistake because of the total amount of deaths and injuries from both sides and the land that was destroyed in Vietnam. America did not handle the war as well as possible, which led to a defeat. So I would have protested the war some way, but I don’t think I would have been a “hippie hippie”.

-Maher Abou-Rass
4th Hour

Anonymous said...

18. Who was to blame for the Kent State shootings: the National Guard, the students, or someone else? What other ways could this have been handled?

I think the blame was on both the student and the National Guard because they both played a role in it. The students were protesting the war and things got out of hand and the National Guard took bad actions. I think they should have been more responsible and not have led the students to resort to a more violent protest. If the National Guard wasn’t there, I don’t think the protesters would have turned violet, the National Guard provoked it. And in the end they resorted to violence which wasn’t necessary. They open fired on the students, who didn’t deserve that at all. They had the right to protest their thoughts. I think a better way to handle the situation then what happened would be to calmly address the situation and escort the people away.


jourdan g
4th

Anonymous said...

I believe that in a few ways it is disloyal to American when citizens don’t support the troops who are fighting in a war. I think that our troops should have support from the people who are at home and not fighting. I think that it is very brave of the soldiers to go and risk their lives to fight to protect their country, but in some wars soldiers are there fighting for no clear purpose, and are just there killing people and innocent citizens. But many people don’t always support the war because war is bad and they don’t see a purpose in fighting when the two sides could negotiate. But sometimes fighting has to occur to keep a country safe from other nations. I don’t think that people should have to be forced to support troops, or a war, or even the president during the time of war because they should be able to believe and support whatever they want.

Stefanos T. 2nd Hour

Anonymous said...

18. Who was to blame for the Kent State shootings: the National Guard, the students, or someone else? What other ways could this have been handled?

First of all I believe that it was definitely not the students’ fault because they have the right to protest and were not being violent or majorly disruptive it was just a normal student protest of the 1960’s and 1970’s. Nobody seems to know why the Ohio national guardsmen shot at the students, the students were not being violent or disruptive, the students had no way to defend themselves the guardsmen just unmercifully massacred 4 students and injured nine.
The best way to handle the Kent State shootings would have been to have the guardsmen try to stop the students by asking them cancel the protest or move the protest elsewhere and if the students did not listen they could have been somewhat physical but definitely not kill or injure anyone.

Ryan Gillis
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

I do not think it is disloyal if citizens of America do not support the American troops who are fighting in the war. I feel that supporting, or in other words donations or giving money, to the troops is another way of supporting the war in a sense. You can support the troops if you believe in the war and support the war but if your against it why would you give money to strengthen it? I understand the concerns and the argument you could put up when dealing with disloyalty to America but not everyone supports what America does. Sometimes not even the majority of the people of America support what the government does. Funding the troops is another way of supporting the governments decision to go to war and like I said, if you support the war you should fund. It is not disloyal to not support the troops fighting in the war. Wouldn’t the government rather want the American people to not support the war by not giving donations instead of going on strikes.

Ryan Bertrand
Hour 2

Anonymous said...

15.
I do think protestors influenced Americans leaving Vietnam. The protestors in huge numbers let the government know that there were a lot of people who didn’t support the war they were in. Although most of the protestors considered disloyal, by the end of the war 70% of Americans wanted to end the war. The protestors also were heard by the soldiers who wondered why they were fighting a war that the people of their country didn’t support. This lowered their morale and strongly influenced their actions in the war. The protestors wanting to end the war split the country in to two halves, the ones who supported the war and the ones who didn’t. This divide at home caused the government to not only focus on the war, but focus on trying to keep the country together and deal with all the chaos that was going on because of the war. This huge number of people who didn’t support the war along with the fact the war didn’t appear to end anytime soon influenced America’s decision to leave Vietnam.

Robbie Lewis
5th hour

Anonymous said...

7. Do you think the chemical nicknamed Agent Orange was appropriate to use considering the destruction and casualties? Why or why not?

Personally, I do not think that Agent Orange was appropriate to use during the Vietnam War. They say that the purpose of spraying Agent Orange was to defoliate forest areas that where the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces could be hiding and to destroy crops that fed the enemy. The reason that I think it was unnecessary to spray Agent Orange is because of all the side effects and bad things that happened in result to the spraying. Some effects from this are former soldiers that have cancer now and that have died from it, the mutations of people that lived in the area, and the 30 percent of the land that was destroyed. I question whoever made the decision to spray Agent Orange that if they even should have been in charge of that big of a decision because they obviously didn’t think through all of the consequences that happened from just spraying some chemical.

Derek M.
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

5.) If the draft was still around like it was in Vietnam, life would be a whole lot different, especially for young adults 18-26. For example, young adults would get scared about getting drafted and going off to fight in the war. They would have to make a choice. Being hated or looked down on by their family and friends for skipping out on the draft. Or going to fight with honor and pride for your country. I know that if this was the case for me then I would choose to allow my self to be able to get drafted to go fight in the war. I would give it all my honor and pride to defend my country, and help America win even if I could pay the ultimate price. I would do this because I wouldn’t want to be remembered as the one who skipped out on the draft and the one who is not proud to be an American.

Andrew Littlefield
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

Do you think President George H.W. Bush should have gone after Saddam Hussein and his army after freeing Kuwait in 1991? Why or why not? No I do not think that George H.W. Bush should have gone after Saddam Hussein in 1991 for many reasons. For the most important reason 12 years later his son George W. Bush did invade Iraq and did go after Saddam Hussein and it took us no where, except for the responsibility of a country in chaos. Since the country is in chaos we spend thousands of dollars trying to fix it where we could use that money to help our own people here in the United States. For the most important reason it has coasted us thousands of young American soldiers lives. If George W. Bush had gone after Saddam Hussein in 1991 then the exact same things would have gone on then just like they are occurring now. I strongly agree with George H.W. Bush for not going after Saddam Hussein in 1991.

Tyler Howe 2nd hr

Anonymous said...

In the event of the Kent State shootings, the blame really can’t be placed on anybody in particular. If you look at what happened on that day, its pretty easy to see that everyone must be blamed for this, the protestors, the National guards, and even the university. One of the groups who can be blamed is the Ohio National Guard, who fired shots and tear gas into the protestors. The Ohio National Guard had been allowed to handle and use loaded weapons to control wild crowds, but in reality it’s never used and should never have been used. That was probably not one of their brighter moves. But I guess you could say that they needed to, they were outnumbered, running out of tear gas and there was possibly sniper fire. Even so, they should have never shot at unarmed defenseless people, it’s just not right. Still you have to consider what the protestors did to cause it which is why a lot of the blame is put on them. The night before they set that ROTC building on fire, that is not my idea of peace, plus I’m sure that the national guardsmen didn’t forget that the nest day. I think that it was a terrible tragedy, but the kids had it coming, they were just instigating the National Guard, and you could say that they just got scared into shooting. You could also place some blame on the university, but mainly I think that the blame should be put strictly on the National Guard, and the protestors. I think that the protestor should have been more cooperative, and much less reckless and irresponsible. And on the other hand the National Guard should have used more troops, and not used lethal weapons. Some good did come out of this, we have learned from our mistake, and we can hope that something like this never happens again.

Matt Bajorek
4th hour

Anonymous said...

7. I do not believe that the chemical nicknamed Agent Orange was appropriate to use considering the destructoin and casualties because 19 million gallons were used and the herbicide caused health problems for those expose during the Vietnam War. They should have used more of Agents Blue and White becuase those were part of the same program but did not contain dioxins which were unhealthy and dangerous. The exposer to Agent Orange cause many people various types of cancer and also many genttic effects. Over 4.8 million Vietnamese people were victims of Agent Orange and that is alot of people. That is why i do not think it was worth using because it cause too many problems for many people
Ian Perfitt
U.S. History 2B
5/4/08

Anonymous said...

3. I can only hope that the Iraq War that we are in now will not turn out the same way that the Vietnam War turned out. I am surprised that with all of its similarities we got into the war in the first place. I though that America would learn from its mistakes, but I guess I was wrong. I personally don’t think that the war is going to end in the same fashion just because so many people are seeing the similarities in the two wars. I think that it might not end the way we want it to, or in a good way. It should though, be different from the way the Vietnam War ended. Ideally the war should have already ended we should have gotten out earlier, but since we decided to stay I can only hope that we get out of this in a good way. Maybe with the new presidency, will come peace in Iraq and we can pull all troops out of the Middle East.
Frederick Carington
5th Hour

Anonymous said...

2. When public support is so low for a war (Vietnam / Iraq), why did/do we continue to fight that war?
I think that that we keep fighting the war such as we did in the Vietnam war and were doing in Iraq because of what we’ve done and all we’ve gone through. There has been too much lives lost and sacrificed for this country for us to just leave as if nothing happened. We paid a lot of money for these wars and we cant just get out without anything coming from it. We at least took over the government in Iraq, but it would be chaos, or more chaos, if we just left the country with no control at all. The people there are depending and relying on us, and we cant leave them to deal with their own problems because they cant fix the problem on their own, they need our help and we should and still should help them. It seems as though our responsibility to help this dying country, because they are people too, and should be treated the same as us.
Trevor Nielsen
2nd Hour

Anonymous said...

15. No I don’t think the student protest influenced America’s decision to leave Vietnam. The reason the United States army left Vietnam was due to South Vietnam given up. Students held numerous sit ins and protest against the Vietnam war. S.D.S. held numerous protest against the Vietnam war and other organizations, said failures invoked the creation of the Weathermen. Their mission was to bring the war home and get the troops to leave Vietnam. Numerous acts of destructions upon government buildings didn’t sway the governments perspective on Vietnam. The government terminated (arrested/ killed) many key figures in numerous organizations such as Fred Hampton Huey Newton and many founding members of the weatherman. These terminations of these people made it possible for the continuation of their intervention in Vietnam. Even with these student protest the government didn’t leave Vietnam and attempted to wait for the Viet Cong to give up but it back fired and south Vietnam gave up first.
Raphael Egziabher
5th hour

Anonymous said...

Question #7
I think that the chemical used to burn leaves off trees in Vietnam, Agent Orange, was severely inappropriate. At the time, I suppose, no one knew that the chemical would have extreme after-effects such as causing cancer. But looking back, it was a waste of the government’s time and money. Agent Orange forced the Viet Cong soldiers out of the jungle, but they still were able to hide and ambush our troops, so Agent Orange really didn’t even help out our troops that much. On top of all that, it completely destroyed the beautiful jungles of Vietnam. The jungle was resourceful in terms of many things, such as wood, water, and I’m sure a lot of animals lost their home. Also, Agent Orange completely messed up Vietnamese people’s lives, by giving them cancer, causing birth defects, and ultimately causing many deaths. I believe the government did not think the choice of using Agent Orange all the way through

TJ Hyland 5th Hour

Anonymous said...

7. I do not think that the chemical Agent Orange was appropriate to use in the Vietnam War. Agent Orange is a chemical that defoliates the forests and clears it away. This was used in the war to clear away the forests where the Viet Cong and other guerillas were hiding. Agent Orange is a very dangerous chemical. It is extremely toxic. The military was not aware of how dangerous Agent Orange was at the times of Vietnam. The chemical hurt the wildlife and many of the people in the war. And many of the veterans came down with illnesses and diseases years later from Agent Orange. This chemical can also cause mutations in the cells of humans which can lead to cancer. I also think that using this chemical was not fair because it ruined so much of Vietnam’s wildlife and nature that most of it is unfixable. This was not part of the war, the war was to fight communism, not to ruin the wildlife and human life in Vietnam.

Jason S
4th hour

Anonymous said...

I think that the chemical nicknamed Agent Orange was not appropriate to use considering the destruction and casualties because it not only hurt Vietnamese, it hurt us. The way that it hurt Americans in Vietnam was because it poisoned the Americans. The Americans and the Vietnamese would hide in the forest in Vietnam when they would fight because it was more affective for war. Not only did it harm the Vietnamese, but it also harmed the Americans. It haunted the Americans because it gave them terrible memories of what the war. Some of the soldiers that served the country in the Vietnam war not only went crazy, but a lot of them were suicidal. They were suicidal because the horror that they saw while fighting in Vietnam. I think that the same thing will happen in Iraq. This will happen because the same things that happened in Vietnam are happening in Iraq.
Jake Cramer

Anonymous said...

7. Do you think the chemical nicknamed Agent Orange was appropriate to use considering the destruction and casualties? Why or why not? - Ian, Fred,
Well it really depends. With the knowledge we have today about the chemical and its effects then no it’s not right. Knowing it causes cancer and kills people because of its not just a deadly chemical for plants. Plus with global warming going on and everyone going “green” it would not have been dropped. Because it killed plants and trees and pollute the air. But that’s al with know the knowledge today. But back then we didn’t know about the effects it would have later on people and we didn’t realize how important our vegetation really is. So at the time of the war, we thought it was a good idea so we could get our enemy out of the forest and stop the guerrilla tactics from the vegetation. We saw it as a good weapon to get the enemy not seeing it as killing off plants and people. But there will always be a better weapon or way to get the enemy so that nothing is hurt. But we haven’t found it yet. My opinion is split, it wasn’t right they could of use something a lot less harmful to the earth and air. But they didn’t have the knowledge we do know. So without the knowledge it was a good weapon and was right to drop on the forest. It really depends how you look at the situation and put your feet in their shoes.
Emma Schwartz
4th Hour

Anonymous said...

Derrick Brown is da man
5th

2. When public support is so low for a war (Vietnam / Iraq), why did/do we continue to fight that war? - Ally

THE PUBLIC DOESNT MATTER. THE MAJORITY WANTS THE WAR TO STOP RIGHT NOW. IT CANT JUST STOP LIKE A VIDEO GAME
___________________________________
17. Should the American people be able to vote against the President's decisions during war time? Why or why not? - Rob S.,

Hecky YEAh
___________________________________
10. If you were on the grand jury in the Kent State shooting case, how would you have voted? Why? - Sarah

I WOULD HAVE GOT UP AND LEFT BECAUSE BOTH PArties Waz Wrong

Megan W said...

4) Why doesn't the media show us the reality of wars? Should they show us the reality of what's going on in Iraq?


I think that the media doesn’t always show us exactly what is going on in the wars, mainly because it usually has a major effect on the American people. I think that whether the war should be fought or not, not everyone is prepared to see the images that the people in the military see. I think that it can seriously change how the people think about the war. I think that this is why the war isn’t usually broadcasted. I think that it should be though, because the American people should have the right to the exact truth if that is what they want. I think that if a station has footage of war, than they should the right to show if it they feel like it, and that it isn’t the government’s right to say that they cant.
Megan W.

Megan K. said...

I think the Ohio National Guard was to blame for the Kent State shootings because they were the ones that decided that firing shots would be a smart way to stop the protesters. The National Guard fired between 61 and 67 shots, leaving nine people injured and one of them permanently paralyzed. The Guardsmen fired into the crowd because they thought that they heard sniper fire and they were outnumbered 20 to 1. They knew they had to do something when they ran out of tear gas, so they decided to shoot into the crowds. This incident could have been handled in other ways that would not have killed or injured anyone.

Megan K.

Megan K. said...

I think the Ohio National Guard was to blame for the Kent State shootings because they were the ones that decided that firing shots would be a smart way to stop the protesters. The National Guard fired between 61 and 67 shots, leaving nine people injured and one of them permanently paralyzed. The Guardsmen fired into the crowd because they thought that they heard sniper fire and they were outnumbered 20 to 1. They knew they had to do something when they ran out of tear gas, so they decided to shoot into the crowds. This incident could have been handled in other ways that would not have killed or injured anyone.

Megan K.

Gina said...

3. I think that the Iraq war will not end the same way as the Vietnam War. The reason why I think that the Iraq war will not end up the same way as the Vietnam war is because of the different facts, yea they have some similarities but there still difffernt, different concepts different reasons. There just different but still the same in very different ways. Like for example, the number of bombings and killing in Vietnam was crazy but the Iraq war has just half of that. Having knowing this, this would make it easier to send troops to Iraq knowing that when they bring back the soldiers, they wont all be dead and in body bags. Another reason is, in Iraq we have only put volunteer forces out to defend our country instead of a draft like most wars have. So that shows Iraq, and getting rid of the fact that Iraq and sections of the Middle East are all filled with terrorism. So with these differences I feel like when we end this war, it will END this war. In Vietnam, there was no positive outcome, expect for the fact that the war was over. So I believe that in the end the Iraq war will take a completely different course than the one in Vietnam, a positive one.

Gina Kalabat
5th hour

Anonymous said...

19.
For the Kent State shooting you can’t really place the blame on one specific group in my opinion. I think the students are partially to blame for the threats of violence, because more than the police force were then involved. However when it comes down to the actual killings I would have to place the blame on the National Guard, they were not instructed to fire and shooting during a riot or protest of any kind will only cause more chaos. Not only was it a tragedy but it also gave our police force, National Guard and country a bad name. These students were standing up for what they believed in, and voicing their opinion on the war that was going on in Vietnam, by shooting it makes our country seem hypocritical considering they have the right to Freedom of Speech. I think the actual shooting were an accident, but everyone involved is partially to blame in the end.l

Jessica Keyes
4th hour

Anonymous said...

I did question Number seventeen...

Yes i do think that the public should be open to any descicion making about the war because what if we dont want the war or if we think that it is pointless because all america does is fight all the TIME..... i am tired of hearing about the war, and i am tires of people saying that they want to go to iraq and they know good and well that they are having a 50 50% chance that they are going to get killed or not..... If you think about it what if the president had little to do w/the war on iraq or maybe it was all the goverments idea.. these things you always have to look on before people start to make any complaints about the war. War is a word that means hate and worst it can mean death. america is in a war that is never going to end... i am not talking about the war in iraq, i am talking about the war w/ouselves, and the question is when are we going tomake the desicion to stop fighting a war that will never end if we keep doing it?......
By: Lydia Gaiters
Hour: 5th

Katie said...

6. Do you think it is disloyalty to America if the citizens don't support the troops who are fighting the war? Why or why not?

I think that it is disloyal not to support the American troops that are over in Iraq fighting the war. The brave soldiers that are over fighting, are risking there own lives to protect America. Although many people disagree with the government, and the war, it does not mean that we can’t still support the people that are fighting for our country. During the Vietnam War, there was a draft, and the men that were drafted had no choice to whether they went to war or not. Many Americans strongly disagreed with the war and wanted to have the troops leave. Once they returned home, there was no welcome home parade, celebrations, or parties. I think that it is very disrespectful to not do that. Although we lost the war, and it was strongly disputed, those brave men did something that takes a lot of courage, and they disserved some kind of a welcome home.

Katie B.

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't the media show us the reality of wars? Should they show us the reality of what's going on in Iraq? I think the media does not show what is going on in Iraq for a good reason. If the real war is shown people will see what is going on instead of just hearing about how many people are being killed. It is shown all of the bad things in the war bombings, deaths, wounded, ect but they do not show the good things in the war like people being saved or helping others. If the war is in the media it may open people’s eyes to what is really going on. This may lead to a realization and possibly protest as it did in the time of the Vietnam war.
Marin Haffey
5th hour

Anonymous said...

17. i do believe people should vote against the president decision to invade [war], but it is really not the presidents choice to go forth wit it is the congress. People should still have a say if they want to go to the war ot not, but as the war continued people stsarted questioning " when will the war stop". Soo whst should the president do now? wait till everyone dies. he kept sending more troops, thats when i think america its self should step in an protest against that

ashley davis
5th hour

Anonymous said...

1. Do you think that the U.S. would have been any safer w/o fighting the Vietnam War? Was it really worth it? Why or why not? I think that the United States might have been safer without fighting the Vietnam War but it is really hard to say. I think that the United States benefited very little from fighting the Vietnam war because the main reason they fought it was so that they could prevent neighboring nations of Vietnam like India from falling victim to communism or the Domino Theory. I do not think that all the American lives that were lost were worth a war that in the end we ended up losing and that did very little except hurt the United States. There could have been a worse outcome if the war hadn’t been fought and the US just gave up but I think that overall the Vietnam War was a waste of time money and American lives.
Phil Bolton 5th

Carleigh Bechtolt said...

When public support is so low for a war (Vietnam / Iraq), why did/do we continue to fight that war?

I think that we continued to fight the Vietnam War because we were already so deep into the War that if we left, it would make things so much worse. Also, we were really needed in that war. The countries depended on us to help them win the war; they wouldn’t be able to do it themselves. If we would have left earlier on in the War then it might not have been so bad. Also, I think that we stayed in the war because it was now apart of our lifestyle at the time. For the Iraq War, I really don’t understand why we are still there. Hasn’t American learned what will happen if we stay in a war for too long, things go wrong. We just get too deep into the war and we end up not being able to leave. If we took out troops out of Iraq now, then it would just all be chaos, people would try and take over and their government would fail again. It seams like the only reason that were still there is to keep their economy and government together. Why cant some other country help out Iraq too. We have been in this for too long.

Carleigh Bechtolt

Anonymous said...

Question # 6 I believe that it is not disloyal to be on your troops side because you have a freedom of speech and you have the right to be on whomever side you wanna be on. Just because you live in the country does not mean you have to support them. Most people believe that there country is not worthy to give them their respect that they might deserve. I some what nuetral. I'm not taking anyone's side. I believe that the war in the first place is STUPID. Just because one of are nations favorite city's got bombed does not mean we go out there and fight back. As the saying goes "two wrongs do not make a right"

Tommy Syrkett 2nd hour