My dad was born in 49, he never had to fight in a war. On the other hand it would have been a hell of a ride for him to tramp to Woodstock from western Europe.
Comment on Anon lives on a budget
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks agoborn in 1949 Don’t have to fight in a war
Hmmm
brotundspiele@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
TheBat@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Worth it for that hippie kitty🥰
IronBird@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
you could pay not to fight
burntbacon@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Putting it in context, it’s probably right. There are a lot of different swathes/classes of boomer, and the ones that would be able to do the listed in lines 7-10 are probably not the ones that were targeted for conscription in vietnam.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
No doubt, but at least we’re acknowledging 'Nam.
AppleTea@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
It’s Korea that typically gets ignored in the US. In fact, that war does fall under the time-frame we’re looking at and wikipedia says about 1.5 million were drafted for it.
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Someone born in 1949 would not have to fight in a war that ended when they were 4 years old.
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Korea wasn’t legally considered a war for bullshit political reasons for far too long and as a result veterans and families of veterans were denied benefits they should have received after giving some or all for the country now fucking them over
baines@lemmy.cafe 3 weeks ago
nam wasn’t a ‘war’ /s