Perfection
The Great Head.
Mayaguez incident in which US Marines were lost is considered the last battle of the Vietnam War it occured May 12–15, 1975
Fast Food, Retail workers stage walkout in downtown Chicago
- Thread starter downtown
- Start date
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
That incident didn't happen in Vietnam or even involved any Vietnamese forces, but involved the Khmer Rouge out of Cambodia on an island 43 km SW of Cambodia.
Nor does it change the fact of when all US military personnel left Vietnam years before.
Perfection
The Great Head.
all I know is the marines killed their got their names carved in stone on the Vietnam War memorial.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Then I am educating you. The battle itself happened off the coast of Cambodia involving the Khmer Rouge, not Vietnam or the NVA on a small Island to the SW of Cambodia.
So in truth, you bringing it up doesn't change any of the facts I've given recently here.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Sadly MobBoss, you have less credibility with me then a war memorial. If it's good enough for the wall, it's good enough for me. 
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Sadly MobBoss, you have less credibility with me then a war memorial. If it's good enough for the wall, it's good enough for me.
I'm just giving you the truth about it Perf, so its not an issue of credibility at all. If you want to be like that, and be dismissive of simple historical fact, that's your business.
I'm sure its on the wall as you say. Doesn't change the facts surrounding the actual battle however. And you being unwilling to recognize simple historical fact about it is rather childish to be honest.
But hey, you act how you want. It's no biggie to me.
Perfection
The Great Head.
I'm not disagreeing with your facts, I'm disagreeing with your conclusion. It's on the Vietnam War memorial it's part of the Vietnam War. You can get all pissy about details that would make it somehow not part of the Vietnam War, but it's considered part of it.
The Khmer Rouge was a belligerent in the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War didn't occur solely in Vietnam. So I don't see how your objections are valid.
The Khmer Rouge was a belligerent in the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War didn't occur solely in Vietnam. So I don't see how your objections are valid.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Except I haven't given one. I never said it wasn't included in the Vietnam war, or not located on the memorial. I merely stated facts about the battle itself.
You are arguing against something I never said or implied.
Again, it being a part of it or not does not alter or defeat my earlier corrections of your allegations. It literally doesn't matter, and you are merely trying to score some forum points where none exist to score.
What objections? I haven't made any!
Again, this was my comment that you replied to about the battle:The Mayaguez incident does not change/alter or defeat the facts of this comment in any way, shape or form. Again, you are arguing against nothing I've tried to put forth.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
You might try reading the thread to see how we got here.
It went from fast food employees, to veteran hiring to Perf bringing up the Vietnam war.
Just some typical OT thread progression.
Mobboss is being picky on details that he's wrong about so that people won't realize he's wrong about the big picture.
Perfection
The Great Head.
I am under the impression that you were saying this as something against the following statement.
"So quick did some homework, and while there probably are some guys from the Vietnam war who are in their late 50s (most forces were removed in 1972 but there remained forces there for 3 years after) the youngest draftees are 61, they're still in the workforce."
I still believe that my statement here correct, and that none of your comments undermine it. If you agree with it and were just making an aside, then I don't have an issue.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
I'm not wrong at all. You desiring it to be so isn't a method to proving it either.
Again, all military forces left the country in 1972. That's simply a fact. The men that reacted to the incident in question didn't come out from Vietnam, but from the Philippines and Okinawa.
And I even gave an example of how someone in their late 50s could have served in Vietnam; but the window for that to have occurred was very, very narrow, since we weren't putting anymore troops in by mid 1971, and were instead starting the effort to leave the country.
In other words, there are going to very, very, very few Vietnam Vets that are less than 10 years older than I am (I turn 50 this year). The vast, vast majority of them will be mid 60s to early 70s.
You left this quote of yours out as well:
Perfection
The Great Head.
Again, do you agree with my statement or not?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Perfection
The Great Head.
I agree that drafted Vietnam vets (among Vets in general) were in their 60s or older.
Do you agree with my statement or not?
Do you agree with my statement or not?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Which statement? You've made several.
Perfection
The Great Head.
@MB: This one
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
No, I don't agree with all of that statement and already showed parts of it to be false. Here are my objections:
1. It's false when you state 'most forces were removed in 1972'. All military forces were removed from Vietnam by August 1972. That is simply the fact of the matter.
2. When you say '...but there remained forces there for 3 more years...' is also misleading. The mere handful of government civilian personnel that remained are in no way accurately defined as a 'force'; and the use of 'force' implies some type of military unit, all of which left in 1972.
