our "foot-soldiers"

[Samuel Moyer]

Thought I'd buzz in here on the homeless issue since I spent a few years at
the end of the 80's running a shelter for homeless men.  1 in 3 is a high
number.  But you can come up with numbers in a variety of ways depending
much on who you count as homeless.  There is no denying that a huge segment
of the homeless population were Vietnam Vets.  At my shelter we attempted to
track this sort of thing and I can't remember exactly, but I'd say it was
more like 1 in 6 or 7.... but that could be misleading too because Vietnam
Vets may have been more likely to sleep elsewhere.  We did act as a postal
address for many receiving disability who did not stay at our shelter and
many of these individuals were vets, but more often they were mentally ill.
I read an interesting argument once and then tried to test it, though I
didn't make a good study of this, it seemed trustworthy, that there was an
effort during the Johnson years to recruit the homeless for Vietnam duty.  I
found several cases where men had been homeless before going to Vietnam and
so their homelessness could not be blamed on Vietnam alone.  I just read a
history of The Seven Years War (1754 - 1763 - yes that comes to 9 - don't
blame me).  In it there was a discussion of raising troops among the
colonists.  First you try to recruit the number of soldiers you need.  Then
you fill out the remaining spots by impressing soldiers.  Occasionally a
wealthy kid would be impressed and then this would lead to a high payment
for a replacement.  Most often, however, those doing the impressing would go
into the town center looking for people who were not suitably employed, day
laborers and such.  This seems to me very similar to the Vietnam War.
Blacks and the homeless were less likely to get out of serving, if drafted,
than whites.  Serving in the military also offered an escape for people
living poorly.  My uncle was impressed - sort of - A poor 18 year old who
got in some trouble (1966 - stealing beer out of a beer truck) the judge
offered him military duty or jail.  He is retired from the army now and
living well in Tampa.  Who doesn't know a story like that?  Fact is that a
high number of the homeless Vets can be explained by their condition before
the war, not the war itself.  Anyway, that is my take so don't come looking
to me for specific facts, I don't believe trustworthy stats exist anyway.

Sam

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terrance" <lycidas2 at earthlink.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: our "foot-soldiers"


>
>
> Dan Jizzenberry wrote:
> >
> > When we look at the facts, we can identify a difference in the economic
> > status of the people that served in the USA services during W.W.II and
> > since W.W.II.
> >
> > >>>>>No shit.
> >
> > But this fancy foot work, foot soldiers, officers, working class,
> > substantial middle class, poor, black, welfare recipients.... is a waste
> > of time.
> >
> > >>>>>Is it? Does equality mean anything to you? Does it shock you to
find
> > >>>>>out that, in the 1980s, nearly 1/3 of America's homeless population
> > >>>>>were Vietnam vets. More fancy footwork?
> >
> > The facts are available from several reliable sources.
> >
> > >>>>>Such as? Let me help you out. How about Loren Baritz's "Backfire"?
Or
> > >>>>>Stanley Karnow's "Vietnam: A History"? Or Josefina J. Card's "Lives
> > >>>>>After Vietnam: the personal impact of military service"? Or Michael
> > >>>>>MacLear's "Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War"? Or Andrew E. Hunt's
"The
> > >>>>>Turning Point: A History of Vietnam Veterans Against the War"? None
of
> > >>>>>these sources have the temerity to claim that the Vietnam war was
> > >>>>>equitable in the least, and none of them are historians who are
known
> > >>>>>for producing leftist propaganda. Why do you think Al Gore made a
point
> > >>>>>of telling the nation that he willingly enlisted to fight in
Vietnam?
> > >>>>>If it was common for rich white boys to sign up for a tour of duty
in
> > >>>>>Vietnam, Al's confession/public relations stunt would have been a
> > >>>>>futile act to say the least.
>
> But you have no facts to support your claim. Your claim is false.
>
> A bibliography is not proof. If you provide the facts I will reply.
> But why should we have this discussion? So you can insult me with stupid
> questions like, does equality mean anything to you.
>
> When we look at the facts, we can identify a difference in the economic
>  status of the people that served in the USA services during W.W.II and
>  since W.W.II.
>
> You claim that the economic status of W.W.II soldiers was higher than
> the economic status of soldiers since W.W.II.
>
> I disagree with your claim. I asked you to provide facts. You have not.
> It is unlikely that you will.
>
> End of discussion,