Shame GI Dogs in Vietnam didn't get same treatment....

Having once seen a documentary of emotional American Vietnam Vets recounting how they had to leave their four legged "GI" (government issue) search and rescue war partner behind when their tour ended, I was touched at how some forty years later, these Viet Vets still mourned having to leave their four legged war buddies behind, because the dogs were "expandable", just like any other government issued bit of equipment.

So I'm pretty taken aback by this story of four legged animal rescues from places like Iraq:

 

The Viet Nam War was a different era and a different America, with sometimes shameful, disrespectful, and hateful attitudes towards us Vets.
It's really great to see that America is not repeating the same mistakes towards servicemen, that it made back then.

(Now, if only the government would stop repeating it's mistakes)

 

Vietnam may have been a different era, but I still reckon that when a government decision boils down to a cost, I don't believe "warm and fuzzy" attitudes will continue to abide, unless funded by private or sub-govt organisations.

I would be also be interested in seeing how effective this "Charlie" rescue program would be for "GI" dogs used in oversea war areas...would such four legged soldiers be abandoned as their predecessors were in Vietnam when their human partners returned home when the war/conflict ended?

There are animal rights, which varies when animals are used by governments for whatever their cause may be.

I would be delighted if someone could prove my cynical thoughts wrong.

 

Notice I said America, not the government.

 

No...hadn't noticed...there is a huge difference, being that America (like Australia) is made up of a people population. As for government bodies - now that is a different aspect.

 

Not wanting to prove you wrong, but in both wars the opposition liked to hide explosives in or on any given place or person a Solder may be near. I can't help to think that a distressed animal would be any different.

 

I see those dogs serving as soldiers...and they served longer than their handlers...so I can imagine the distress suffered by those dogs.

Only 204 dogs exited Vietnam during the 10-year period. Some remained in the Pacific, and some returned to the United States. None returned to civilian life. Most dogs that remained were euthanised and the others where turned over to the South Vietnamese.

Australia was no different, though not as many dogs went to Vietnam as their American cousins.

Someone has just proven me wrong (delight!) where Australia is concerned:
The Australian defence force has rediscovered the skill of tracker dogs and training more than ever before. The Royal Australian Air Force uses dogs for war time roles...and there's no question nowadays of leaving the dogs behind, because dogs are now considered too valuable an asset. Dogs now serve their time in quarantine, often with their handlers by their side.

I wonder if the same is done with dogs in the American forces.

 

But this is two different arguments (discussions)

If we abandon animals overseas then there should be hell to pay for the potential cruelty and suffering that would surely come to the animal.

The article points to an abandoned Iraqi :confused dog. This is different from training an animal and then abandoning it in a war zone. It was not put there by the troops but was rescued by them.

My point is that if the insurgents notice we are saving deprived animals how long is it until members of the armed forces are blown up by an IED placed under an animal.

I'm not saying we should ignore the displaced animals, but do feel that maybe the Iraqis could agree on a program to save them. Our guys are in enough harms way as is.

 

Understand all the comments you put forward.

I'm not trying to put forward two different arguments/discussion.

I simply started off by saying that I was "taken aback" by the American rescue action of "Charlie" which kicked off the animal rescue program. I compared this to the inaction for those war dogs which the American handlers were forced to be abandoned in Vietnam.

Australia was just as guilty in this respect with tracker dogs taken to Vietnam.

Same guilt goes back to the First World War, Australian soldiers were told to abandon their faithful mounts that had carried the Australian light-horsemen to glory in the Middle East. Many of the Australian soldiers shot their horses rather than abandon them to an uncertain fate.

 

I understand everything I said with clarity.

I think we each are focusing on two different subjects. I in the quoted text and you in the original post post as a whole. I will stop before I take this off topic any further.

 

this is a very emotive subject, as an ex military man that served with the US and Australian soldiers in Viet nam (UK Royal Marine Commandos) in 1969 and remember they were conscripts at that time I was appalled at the way vets were treated when they returned home after serving their governments wishes so is it any wonder they treated their four legged friends with such callousness.

as for the vets themselves i have the utmost respect for them having done a job under such difficult circumstances.

and to those who condemn them i say remember you are free today because your military keep you safe.

and it's nice to know that the American people are beginning to respect the members of the military

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/5034/95169146hw4.jpg

 

If that "Charlie" story is a turn in the wind of attitudes nowadays towards our soldiers which in turn pulls in those animals put to work by our defence forces, then we have come a long way in attitude and consideration compared to the past shown of our Vietnam vets.

During Vietnam, caring handlers pleas to bring home their dogs, even at their own costs and the emotional effect and attachment between them and their animals was not taken into consideration.

Whereas, this "Charlie" story, highlighted the emotional impact on the soldiers, noted by this quote from Stephanie Scroggs, a spokeswoman for SPCA International:

That's pretty much the point I was trying to make...ie hopefully we have done a positive turn around.

 

I would hope that things have gotten a little better for our 4 legged friends after 30 to 80 years or so. I know my 13 year old mutt is well cared for. I suspect my countries millitary is also caring for the animals properly now.

E