HOW MANY TIMES DOES A PERSON HAVE TO APOLOGIZE...

This message has been deleted by an administrator

I just ignore them.

HOW MANY TIMES DOES A PERSON HAVE TO APOLOGIZE

My thoughts exactly.

I'm not going to "blast away" I'm just going to explain why the anger remains and why only she can change that. This is from the perspective of a historian, not a veteran.

It is one thing to have opposed the Vietnam War on the grounds that it was costly and not something that America could have successfully won, or that America was not capable of achieving a noble goal. Many people from all walks of life came to feel that, and believed that if there wasn't going to be an effort to win or that to win would result in a price too high to pay and that was perfectly understandable.

That is *not* however the same as seeing something noble in the enemy. The Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese were not heroic revolutionaries resisting "American invavsion" or fighting for the aspirations of the Vietnamese people, they were a barbarous and brutal Communist regime in keeping with the tradition of Communist regimes that collectively in the 20th Century were responsible for a human death toll that exceeded 70 to 80 million. Ho Chi Minh is often described falsely as someone who was a nationalist first and a communist second and that America flubbed a chance to ally with him, but that is a lie that does not stand up to the actual record. Ho was in fact an *international* Communist, trained in Moscow during the days of Lenin (the man responsible for the terror campaigns of his secret police organization the Cheka), an admirer of both Stalin (the monster responsible for the manmade famine of the Ukraine, the Purges and a lot more) and Mao Tse-Tung (the monster responsible for the Great Leap Forward, which left some 30 million people dead) and who willingly would betray any non-communist group in Vietnam fighting against the French. When he took power in North Vietnam in 1954, thousands died while over 7% of the population fled south rather than live under Hanoi's rule. In 1968, the VC, the puppet creation of Hanoi, slaughtered more than 3000 in Hue during the Tet Offensive (an incident that rated not a single word on network television in this era, even as Americans were fed stories night after night about random, isolated instances that allegedly told a tale of American brutality etc. Hanoi was also in this period allied with the Khmer Rogue rebels of Cambodia who were responsible for the Killing Fields when they took over in 1975 that left three million dead at least. And when Hanoi finally conquered the South in 1975 after America had pulled out, we then saw the establishment of "re-education camps" and the plight of the Boat People. Two more tragedies for human rights that should tell us at bare minimum that this was an enemy that was evil, and which if there had been justice in this world, should not have been allowed to win. Could we have prevented that? The debate goes on and good people can make the argument either way but what there can be no debate about is what the Communist were. Too many human victims of Hanoi over decades settled that question long ago and we shame their memories when we don't acknowledge it.

Jane Fonda's anti-war activism was rooted entirely in the base concept that Hanoi represented the good guys in the war, courageously fighting for their lands against evil America. It was because of this that she went beyond marching against the war to doing anti-American propaganda broadcasts from Hanoi and also spreading disinformation about the treatment of American POWs who were subjected to brutalities and inhumane treatment that further underscored the monstrousness of this particular regime. In doing this, she crossed a line into cheering for the enemy and an evil one at that, and shaming the honor of those who fought against that enemy.

Fonda's numerous "apologies" have never started with any acknowledgment that she was badly naïve about the Communists or that the Communist government she did propaganda for was evil. Basically, she has apologized only for posing and laughing in an anti-aircraft gun which only represents the branches and not the root cause of what was so repulsive about what she and other like-minded people of this era did. After she got back she also was supporting the bogus charges of the "Winter Soldier" investigation that alleged atrocities by American soldiers that never happened (and were debunked by Neal Sheehan of the New York Times, who was as anti-war as they came!) and she also went on TV and frequently pushed the propaganda line of the North Vietnamese. I've never heard any apology from her that represented an apology for dishonoring her country by pushing the propaganda line of an American enemy that had no redeeming qualities whatsoever. To this day, she still sees her actions as misguided patriotism as she defines the term motivated by some deep principle but that argument isn't going to pass muster without a repudiation of those who were cut from the same totalitarian cloth that also gave us Hitler (Stalin's ally from 1939-41).

That's why we still are where we are. If Fonda were to take the courageous step and disown the Communists she praised and apologies for that, the ball would be back in the court of her critics. Until then, it's still in hers.

The haters are so ridiculous that it's hilarious. lol
If they really wanted to know the facts instead of old exaggerated tall tales, they would read the FBI files and transcripts that exonerate Ms. Fonda from ANY wrong doing. They're public record folks. Read the facts before perpetuating your silly hate.
Besides, opposing a war that so many also opposed doesn't make you an American traitor.
Oh and here's the kicker for the haters, our AMERICAN SOLDIERS are the ones that went to her to recruit her for THEIR cause.
These silly idiots that spread hate towards her truly crack me up because of their lack of knowledge. lol
Ms. Fonda, you ROCK!! Love you and all that you stand for and all of your work!

So, basically, what your post boils down to is this: She rooted for the bad guys and not the good guys?

Fonda's activism centered on anti-US sentiment. She called out our government for the atrocities it committed during the conflict and she stands by that. That does NOT mean she was cheering the North Vietnamese as they committed grievous civil-rights violations against the innocent.

It also does NOT mean she hasn't fully atoned for any grief her words or actions may have caused US service members. While apologizing for the photograph, she included a blanket apology for ANYTHING she may have done to hurt them and/or their families.

"I would like to say something, not just to Vietnam veterans in New England, but to men who were in Vietnam, who I hurt, or whose pain I caused to deepen because of things that I said or did. I was trying to help end the killing and the war, but there were times when I was thoughtless and careless about it and I'm very sorry that I hurt them. And I want to apologize to them and their families."

We'll see who is the filthiest person alive! We'll just see!

She called out our government for the atrocities it committed during the conflict and she stands by that.

What "atrocities"? The one she lent her name to was the so-called "Winter Soldier" investigation, headed by Mark Lane, a wacko-fringe attorney who first made a name for himself pushing JFK conspiracy theories perpetrated by the government, then as James Earl Ray's attorney pushing government conspiracies and whose work in Winter Soldier was discredited by the New York Times. This was a fraud that served two purposes:

1-Lying about what America was doing in Vietnam. In fact, if we want to use the yardstick of what constitutes a wartime "atrocity" as defined by the radical anti-war movement, World War II "the Good War" had more examples that could qualify for that. American bombing campaigns were limited in nature compared to World War II and pilots sometimes found themselves shot down and captured because of the restrictions they had to operate under. There was a lot of government ineptitude when it came to pursuing war policy but to commit ineptitude based on bungled strategy is not the same as committing "atrocities."

2-Serving the propaganda interests of the enemy. By willingly promoting lies about American conduct in Vietnam, this fed the phony narrative that America was "destroying" Vietnam and that if America left all would be wonderful, and thus minimized the real atrocities of Hitlerian/Stalinist proportions committed by the North Vietnamese as well as their Cambodian allies the Khmer Rogue. To call what the Hanoi government did "civil rights violations" would be like saying the Holocaust was a case of "civil rights violations" and grievously understates the matter.

A blanket apology as you're defining it seems to me more a case of trying to avoid dealing with the heart of the matter which would require acknowledging "I was a fool to have let the North Vietnamese use me for their purposes and I denounce them for the atrocities I know they committed and that ultimately, the United States motives in Vietnam were based in good intentions." The apologies I've seen appear to purposefully avoid dealing with this, because that would require going far beyond a simple "I was thoughtless and insensitive" declaration to one of having to acknowledge that a fundamental political truth she devoted herself to was in fact a lie. Without it, it comes off to me from a purely objective standard (in which I don't say I hate her or wish she burns in Hell or anything like that) as a case of trying to have both sides of an argument. In the end it wasn't just the soldiers she dishonored with her actions it was also the South Vietnamese who suffered even more at the hands of Hanoi and lost their country.

I'm willing to keep up the discussion because I have no use for soundbite slogans even from those who hate her because they don't make the case properly any more than those who knee-jerk defend her.

"What atrocities?" You MUST be joking.

1. Lying about Vietnam. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/29/opinion/lying-about-vietnam.html Here's a link. I'd dictate it myself but I'm late for a cookout. Our government was doing a lot more damage than they were telling the public. And by "atrocities," I also mean the soldiers who were raping, torturing, and killing innocent civilians (the elderly, women, and children). Does My Lai ring a bell? And why are you comparing WWII with Vietnam? Apples and oranges. Stick to the topic, please.

2. Serving the propaganda of the enemy. Fonda called out the US AND NV for generating propaganda. Her problem with the US was that she believed they were brainwashing POWs into thinking and saying they had been tortured while she contends she saw for herself that they were not. Was she mistaken? Who knows? The fact is that she believed it, believed it was wrong, and spoke out against it. Her intentions were pure. As for NV, she has admitted they used her as a propaganda machine while explaining that her naiveté is no excuse for allowing them to do so. "The buck stops here. If I was used, I allowed it to happen."

Without it, it comes off to me from a purely objective standard (in which I don't say I hate her or wish she burns in Hell or anything like that) as a case of trying to have both sides of an argument. In the end it wasn't just the soldiers she dishonored with her actions it was also the South Vietnamese who suffered even more at the hands of Hanoi and lost their country.

Don't give me any of that crap about being objective. We both know better. And are you really trying to say Jane Fonda is the reason South Vietnam lost their country? 

Sorry that Fonda's apology isn't sufficient enough for ya. Maybe the two of you should arrange a time and place for her to get down on her knees and beg for your forgiveness in a way you find appropriate.

What I find really sad is that this conversation is taking place at all. She admits she made some mistakes over 40 freaking years ago, has apologized for them (I get that her apology isn't enough for YOU), and has moved on. Too bad others can't seem to do the same damned thing.

We'll see who is the filthiest person alive! We'll just see!