• loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tangential question. What do Americans think of their soldiers being in Korea and Vietnam? Does it strike as odd to the median American? These two countries posed no direct threat to the USA.

    • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      1 year ago

      What do Americans think of their soldiers being in Korea

      they don’t, it’s completely left out of most American education. if it’s there it is a brief one-sentence mention

      • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yall got some sus education if you only had a single sentence about both the Korean and Vietnam war, and its not like I went to a rich school either (far from it)

        • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          was only talking about Korea, at school (not university/college education). sure maybe it was enough to be a paragraph but I doubt it.

          • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Im talking in terms of high school, albeit I took AP history, but its not like they dont teach about Vietnam and Korea in school, at least in my own experience.

            • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I took AP US History and did pretty well in it and, well, the Korean war was mentioned but it was discussed almost not at all. Vietnam was mostly discussed in relation to the domestic reaction to it with the media coverage, as well as some discussion of “Domino Theory”. Even My Lai hardly got mentioned.

            • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              1 year ago

              you’re probably right that I overstated my case and exaggerated a bit but what was taught a couple decades ago was thin and pretty dire

              • charlie [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Nah, you’re exactly right. And I’m tired of people coming into these threads saying “my bare bones high school level ap course covered this because I recognize the topic you’re saying.”

                If you think that’s true, go read a bunch of actual history books and see how complete you think that education still is.

              • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                If i had to say what they dont teach very much, it would be asian and african history before the 1500s for the most part, unless they had interacted with european settlers at some point in history.

                • boboblaw [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ironically I went to a good high school and we did cover that, but when it came to relatively recent US history, the curriculum was spotty and superficial. I got the sense that teachers wanted to avoid controversial topics and debates.

                  It’s like with ancient African/Asian/American empires, you have a certain psychological distance and can discuss it casually. With recent American history, especially when the history curriculum is necessarily half economics, it can get “controversial”. And I’m sure there was more one “gifted” kid aching to do the bit from Good Will Hunting…

    • DayOfDoom [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      1 year ago

      I do the same shit with Canadians about us having soldiers in Saudi Arabia, Africa, etc. They don’t care and seek to justify it totally and immediately.

      • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I actually was in Canada for a bit and the impression that I got was that of a sense of banality where people did not know how buddy-buddy Canada has been with the US.

        I was not “political” at that point. But the people I knew used to believe that Canada was similar to the US but with the “derangement” separated from the substance.

        • o_d [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Canada is just the USA with a roughly 10 year policy lag and none of the global geopolitical power. Most Canadians see this and develop a superiority complex. They think “at least it’s not as bad up here” or “at least we’re not as brutal as them”. Class consciousness and worker solidarity is basically non-existent. We’re truly a puppet state.

    • By the end of Vietnam most Americans were solidly against it, and I believe “Vietnam was a mistake” has broadly been the belief since then, but mostly because it got American soldiers killed, not because of the horrors they committed.

      • People opposed the draft. Vietnam itself didn’t see much more opposition than any other conflict America decided to stick its nose into, they just didn’t like the idea that they or their family members might be expected to go fight in it

        • combat_brandonism [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Vietnam itself didn’t see much more opposition than any other conflict America decided to stick its nose into

          except by the conscripts, who first made the ground war untenable by organizing and direct action and then made the air war untenable by organizing and direct action

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      In terms of vietnam, at the start, americans were mostly neutral, didnt think strongly of it. Towards the end many americans were heavily against the war. Regardless, having a bias as I would be a child coming from families directly affected by the war, the U.S granted many people from affected countries immigration rights to come to the U.S. mainly Vietnam. Laos and Cambodia (and especially cambodia given how Polpot took it a step further in the wrong direction).

    • theother2020 [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      1) The median American’s default is simply 🇺🇸 👍

      2) The (bipartisan!) think tank version is: the U.S. is the world’s police and that’s a Good Thing because we have Good Intentions (™, ™)

      3) For the most part, the question is not asked outside of explicitly leftist circles