CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

Well by that logic, we should never have fought Japan or Germany. I am NOT defending the war a a good thing. About halfway through my tour I became convinced the war was not winnable and our presence there was questionable at best. Now, i am convinced we should never have been there, thank you Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. Nixon was despicable in his own way!

It is one thing to protest a stupid war. It is another to go to the enemy and support THEM while your country's soldiers are dying.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

No, just an old b***h!

The following was submitted in the U.S. Congress House Committee on Internal Security, Travel to Hostile Areas. [HR16742, 19-25 September 1972, page 761]

[Broadcast]

This is Jane Fonda.

During my two week visit in the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, I've had the opportunity to visit a great many places and speak to a large number of people from all walks of life- workers, peasants, students, artists and dancers, historians, journalists, film actresses, soldiers, militia girls, members of the women's union, writers.

I visited the (Dam Xuac) agricultural coop, where the silk worms are also raised and thread is made. I visited a textile factory, a kindergarten in Hanoi. The beautiful Temple of Literature was where I saw traditional dances and heard songs of resistance. I also saw unforgettable ballet about the guerrillas training bees in the south to attack enemy soldiers. The bees were danced by women, and they did their job well.

In the shadow of the Temple of Literature I saw Vietnamese actors and actresses perform the second act of Arthur Miller's play All My Sons, and this was very moving to me- the fact that artists here are translating and performing American plays while US imperialists are bombing their country.

I cherish the memory of the blushing militia girls on the roof of their factory, encouraging one of their sisters as she sang a song praising the blue sky of Vietnam- these women, who are so gentle and poetic, whose voices are so beautiful, but who, when American planes are bombing their city, become such good fighters.

I cherish the way a farmer evacuated from Hanoi, without hesitation, offered me, an American, their best individual bomb shelter while US bombs fell near by. The daughter and I, in fact, shared the shelter wrapped in each others arms, cheek against cheek. It was on the road back from Nam Dinh, where I had witnessed the systematic destruction of civilian targets- schools, hospitals, pagodas, the factories, houses, and the dike system.

As I left the United States two weeks ago, Nixon was again telling the American people that he was winding down the war, but in the rubble- strewn streets of Nam Dinh, his words echoed with sinister (words indistinct) of a true killer. And like the young Vietnamese woman I held in my arms clinging to me tightly- and I pressed my cheek against hers- I thought, this is a war against Vietnam perhaps, but the tragedy is America's.

One thing that I have learned beyond a shadow of a doubt since I've been in this country is that Nixon will never be able to break the spirit of these people; he'll never be able to turn Vietnam, north and south, into a neo- colony of the United States by bombing, by invading, by attacking in any way. One has only to go into the countryside and listen to the peasants describe the lives they led before the revolution to understand why every bomb that is dropped only strengthens their determination to resist. I've spoken to many peasants who talked about the days when their parents had to sell themselves to landlords as virtually slaves, when there were very few schools and much illiteracy, inadequate medical care, when they were not masters of their own lives.

But now, despite the bombs, despite the crimes being created- being committed against them by Richard Nixon, these people own their own land, build their own schools- the children learning, literacy- illiteracy is being wiped out, there is no more prostitution as there was during the time when this was a French colony. In other words, the people have taken power into their own hands, and they are controlling their own lives.

And after 4,000 years of struggling against nature and foreign invaders- and the last 25 years, prior to the revolution, of struggling against French colonialism- I don't think that the people of Vietnam are about to compromise in any way, shape or form about the freedom and independence of their country, and I think Richard Nixon would do well to read Vietnamese history, particularly their poetry, and particularly the poetry written by Ho Chi Minh.

[recording ends]

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Interesting. No comments about LBJ and JFK. They got us into that war. Sort of...

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Actually, the french started it... Again (and i am french). Unlike the UK whose rule was harsh and exploitative (not mincing my words) the french were... Poisoning their colonies. Prostitution was accepted, even encouraged as it was seen as a way to get the 'moral superiority'. This is why the UK in the end was able to keep some sort of relation with their colonies when the french left only utter devastation and hatred that has lasted decades and may last for centuries.

The US went to war at first to prevent the rise of communism, not realizing what the real causes were in the revolution taking place in the area. Had they instead stopped supporting puppet governments (continuing colonization under the guise of freedom if you really think about it) and created better living conditions (we had the technology) we would not have had these by proxy wars (Vietnam is the most publicized), communism would have stalled w/o firing a bullet.

We have to remember the era, how the US went after its own folks under the McCarthy era. Once this was recognized as crime, the country turned outward. This gave the opportunity for industrialist to creates conditions allowing them to exploit wars for profit. This is still going on, do not be fooled. The US could and still can pull out of the middle east suppressing one of the most dangerous element in that region.

The US had an opportunity to create peace in the middle east long ago, just after WWII but the Dulles brothers not only dropped the ball but opened the door for the soviet union to interfere as well. We still see the effects today and Russia is back at it, exactly as it was before as the Syrian regime was first propped by the soviets. The world mishandling of the jews after WWII is only a small part of the equation. Islam and all the extremist crap surrounding the region is simply a sign of growing desperation. Staying there just amplifies the hatred. God, any god, becomes an excuse and a justification.

So, jumping back to photography... How is photography alive in there and why?

On the palestinian side photography and videos are made to represent themselves as victims. One can agree with that, this is not the question. Photography is used a 'victimization propaganda'. More than once photographs coming from there have been proved to be false, misleading and completely taken out of context.

On the Israeli side photography of the war is simply not allowed. It might (and does) destroy their 'aura' of 'pioneers fighting for their lives'.

When it come to Islam extremist the gruesome images of beheading were publish worldwide creating horror, revulsion and a 'why don't we live these barbaric folks alone'. When this stopped being news and became the new 'normal' the images of mass hanging took over, followed by other atrocities. Photography took its place there both to report the crimes but also as propaganda. Remember the youtube videos showing folks blowing themselves with a islamic narrative and 'weirdly harmonious' chanting?

Then you have the US propaganda when attacking countries that really have no defense to speak off? A display of technology for sale more than anything else is what we saw. Photography and videography were distorted to fit a single goal: profit.

In the end, when you look at it, since its inception 'visual arts' are used to transmit propaganda, not ideas, even less ideals. War photographers, journalists, whatever contribute to this, even if they are honest in their work. What they offer is distorted toward one end or the other. 'Innocent/fair' documentation of anything is really a joke.

The result, in my opinion? A photograph is simply a potential lie or an outright right lie from the onset - regardless of subject.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

There were two points in your post that especially interested me. My son was a combat MP in Iraq during OIF. He said that, had we bombed Iraq for another week, one division, broken into unit components, could have taken the country. I don’t know how many people we has on the ground at the height of the war, but it was entirely too many. The news reports of heavy street-to-street fighting were purposely exaggerated. In most cases, what the situation got so hot that the potential casualty count seemed to be too high, troops withdrew to a safe perimeter and let a few Apaches or patrolling fighters “soften” up the area. Napalm and high explosives are great equalizers. In addition, in rural areas, it didn’t take explosives to destroy a building. An M2 could do the job very efficiently.

The other subject you discussed was prostitution. During the civil war in the US, prostitution was rampant and, in some areas, disabled more soldiers than battle. In several cities captured by the Union, the garrison commander rounded up all the prostitutes, had them checked for STD’s. Those that were clean then had to buy a license to practice, netting extra income for the Union. Those with STD’s were put on trains or boats and shipped to other cities or towns. Incidentally, the licensed prostitutes were rechecked periodically and either re-licensed (pass) or shipped elsewhere (fail). One of the area commanders who effectively used this system (and reportedly skimmed a portion of the license fees for himself was a young ambitious officer named G. A. Custer.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Yes and was giving aid and comfort to the enemy.... And I understand that it was cool to be anti-war at the time but she carried it to extremes. She also was probably alienating many war objectors by carrying it too far. Personally, I was in the military and did multiple visits to the area and hated her at the time and still do. I refuse to watch anything that she is in. It's just my opinion and my right as an American (something she wouldn't understand. By the way, the country that she was so infatuated with, would have had her shot had she done to them what she did to us.

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

WORD, very good word.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

History proved her to be right. She was the only person of conscience with the guts to tell the truth. Nixon and Johnson got what they deserved, they ended their presidencies in disgrace. Jane looks like a million bucks and is enjoying her millions...

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

LBJ escalated the war from 16,000 troops to half a million. JFK was in the process of de-escalating the war when he was killed.
Probably one of the reasons he was killed. Under LBJ and Nixon more bombs were dropped on Vietnam than all of the bombs dropped in WWI, WWII and Korea combined. In WWI and WWII the Germans occupied foreign countries, set up puppet governments, and were eventually defeated. In Vietnam, we occupied a foreign country, set up a puppet government and were eventually defeated. The US has not won a war since WWII. Maybe that's the last time we were on the right side. Maybe JFK was the last president (other than Jimmy Carter) who was willing to do the right thing.

katastrofa Loc: London, UK

An interesting thing about the US is how it idolises its soldiers - it's something disturbingly close to the Prussian and Imperial German militarism. By way of contrast, the British, historically, never harboured any illusions of sainthood about its soldiers (Wellington called his soldiers "scum of the earth", Kipling wrote "single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints"...). Americans on the other hand created the myth of the "greatest generation", completely ignoring the historical record (read this for instance: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-not-always-greatest-generation). It's usually just a thing to smile at, but I think it poisons American politics a bit, by strengthening the warmongerers and the military profiteers.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

I'd say some had no conscience but many did. My Dad was a sergeant who fought in the Italian campaigns, the Battle of the Bulge, and met my Mom during the military occupation of Munich, where he was in charge of the army motor pool, and she was a food server in the GI cafeteria, after being a Serbian guest worker in German munitions plants during the war with her sisters. He fell in love, they were married and I was conceived in Munich in 1945.

He hardly ever spoke of his combat experiences, never joined a veterans organization, and let me play with his ribbons and medals when I was a kid. When he brought my Mom home to Brooklyn as a war bride, there were no jobs, so he worked on construction sites and at night driving a cab. There was no housing so they lived in my grandfather's converted garage. Most of the glorification you speak of is done by the establishment media selling books, selling politics and TV shows. It's generally done by those who profit from war and politics, not those fight the wars.

Attached is a pic of my Dad on leave in Rome during the war.

(Download)

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Love your dad. Proud of him and you.

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

Thank you.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

yes and no, in Vietnam, we were not "embedded" or approved by any military authority. we went pretty much where we wanted and with whom we wanted. so, what folks in the U.S. saw, as you say, were images not seen during any other war, in print or via television. raised hell with Westmoreland, that's for sure. and resulted in lectures daily.

the Pentagon learned quickly. after that, all photogs had to be "embedded" and as a result, self censorship took hold. now, that is not to say that some people, silly though they may be, do not dodder over to places unfamiliar with a lot of folks, and go in on their own. it pays to speak dawi, and pashtun and be really, really stupid. but sometimes the results are work the risk.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I'm not sure all this talk about the motives and effects of Jane Fonda have anything to do with photography.