275
That time the US did Human trafficking
(thelemmy.club)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2026
275 points (96.6% liked)
Just Post
1584 readers
730 users here now
Just post something ๐
Lemmy's general purpose discussion community with no specific topic.
Sitewide lemmy.world rules apply here.
Additionally, this is a no AI content community. We are here for human interaction, not AI slop! Posts or comments flagged as AI generated will be removed.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm curious, what should they have done? Would these kids have had a better life in Vietnam after/during the war or in the US?
The US committed many atrocities and the country is kakistrocratic oligarchy masquerading as a democracy that continues to fuck up the world to this day, but let's consider, what would've been best for orphans in Vietnam at that time?
A lot of these kids weren't actually orphans but were placed in these orphanages temporarily by their parents due to instability with the intention of later retrieval.
However for the Amerasian children (25% of these roughly), I agree that they should have been evacuated. As I mentioned elsewhere on the post, the discrimination and racism they faced after the war in Vietnam was awful.
I don't see another comment from you in this thread, so not sure what's going on there.
Not killing their parents would definitely go a long way for these children. Not going to war and not committing atrocities would also help.
"What do you do with an unwanted pregnancy that's the result of a rape?"
"Don't get raped in the first place."
Unfolding the anology would mean "US is the victim here. "
this was the first thing i noticed, too
Its more like going to the rapist who took the rape baby after the rape and saying that they really shouldn't have raped that person and though the issue with stealing the rape baby is bad a good solution would have been to not rape.
If America didn't invade, no orphans. Really weird you'de equate not invading Vietnam with raping a person
Edit: to clarify, no, the other person didn't say "just don't get raped" or the equivalent. The analogy was wrong. This is my point
much better put than i did
A solution to a problem can't be "travel back in time and prevent yourself from being in this situation" that's not a solution, it's pointing out the obvious source of the problem.
I agree, but that person did not say "just don't get raped." The analogy doesn't work, and is weird to say while being destructive to the conversation.
That comment I replied to made this equivalancy which is table flipping, fuck you I'm going to paint you in the worst light, type behavior.
No, the guy didn't say "just don't get raped" he said "we shouldn't have been raping"
Ok, solution wasn't the proper word, the commenter was talking morality. Taking the babies was wrong and America shouldn't have done it, nor should they have gotten involved afterwards.
Vietnam was at war before the USA got involved, it would have just been a one sided slaughter by the North.
this take was badly expressed. i woke up in the middle of the night to piss and wrote it between walking from the bathroom to the bed. Point I was trying to make was it is a clumsy metaphor that directly casts america as the victim.
Do you have anything to offer that's actually possible to do, a real answer to the question, or do you just feel like being a contrarian little shit today?
Sure, want to undo all the evil humanity has done since its evolution too?