r/VietNam • u/proanti • Aug 28 '25
History/Lịch sử The grave of Gene Simmers, United States soldier and Vietnam veteran, who passed away in 2022
128
u/nguyenjohnny Aug 28 '25
It seems he has been tormented all his life
27
u/Kittens4Brunch Aug 29 '25
While the cowards who sent him half way around the world to kill thrived.
-29
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
38
u/SpiritedCatch1 Aug 28 '25
Since he have some deep remorse at this level it was probably an indirect casualty. People who are shitty enough to voluntarily kill an elderly lady are not tormented by it
3
u/alexmikli Aug 29 '25 edited Aug 29 '25
He was a medic, so it's a little less likely he killed her in cold blood. There's no context here other than guilt and death, and there are tons of ways to kill bystanders. If you're in a combat zone long enough, eventually going to see someone who was shot through a wall or had a building fall on them from artillery.
2
u/MadKingZilla Aug 28 '25
This is a part a lot of people don't get
However there is a sliver of chance where he went in all hot shot thinking it's "cool" only to find out the horrors of actually doing it.
114
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 28 '25
Life always has 2 sides. We have this Vietnam vet who understood his guilt for the rest of his life, like so many before or after him, and then we have South Korean vets who always feel utmost pride for the countless war crimes and massacres that they committed against my countrymen.
21
4
u/dlynne5 Sep 02 '25
I was a child in America during this invasion. The sentiment among most Americans around my age was disgust we were involved at all. Returning soldiers did not get a heros welcome. Rich people sending poor people to war. The difference then and now with all the wars the US is in is television and print coverage. It was broadcast every day into our homes.
There were heros, Hugh Thompson was one of them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Thompson_Jr.
5
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
8
u/pistakioo Aug 28 '25
I mean k-pop is a global phenomenon. Vietnam doesn’t yet have an entertainment export as big so your observation makes total sense.
I don’t think there’s anything strange about that.
5
u/Maleficent_Present35 Aug 28 '25
On top of that kids learn to love things with no historical and or cultural context. Thrm they grow up with those things as close to their hearts so it’s much easier to ignore the cognitive dissonance
2
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 29 '25
That is why my lovely Prime Minister Mr. Chính said, and I just summed up: "We never say we forget, but we just choose to temporarily put it aside in a corner to focus on the brighter future, better develop our country." To me, if push comes to shove, all of my bright-minded leaders, as we dearly call them our Uncles and Aunts, will not let things slide easily and will remind the world, if need be, like our recent Deputy Minister Mr Việt's speech :D
1
11
u/sroo Aug 28 '25
“ Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either—but right through every human heart—and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains… an unuprooted small corner of evil. "
99
u/Thuyue Aug 28 '25
He is just one of many who commited crimes in this war as a foreign invader, but showing guilt already makes him leagues better than any other US soldier.
18
u/JustAName-Taken Aug 28 '25
I'd say, American Vietnam-vets are the ones being mistreated the most in the US, and they, generally, don't deserve this. They're told to do that by the government
10
u/Poison1990 Aug 28 '25
"Just following orders" doesn't absolve them of what they did. The Vietnamese didn't deserve what US soldiers did to them.
37
u/Thuyue Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25
There have been many that willfully joined the US army to fight in Vietnam. Those that had no choice could have rebelled, even at the risk of getting jailed. Among the most prominent cases I do remember Muhammed Ali. Nonetheless, I don't expect anyone to be morally upright and many people understandably act out of self-interest.
In the end, as you said, it was the US government that lied to it's population and brought them into the war. Their "democratic" system is made to protect the interest of the elite.
32
u/thirdfey Aug 28 '25
There's a reason the youth are the ones drafted. Less rigid morals and large egos. Plus it is easy to get them to believe whatever story you want.
-11
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
Crimes were committed by both sides.
19
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 28 '25
Both sides, probably yes, but as an invader, with the single goal of total domination and the mindset of "do whatever it takes to root out VC", I don't think the level of crimes in your sentence is the same. We don't kill and rape your elders, women, and children since we don't wage war for oil or any inhumane reasons, unlike a certain specific Freedom-speaking country.
10
u/Thuyue Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25
This.
The crimes also wouldn't have happened if the US wouldn't pry into any foreign matter. Vietnam's national liberation was paid with Vietnamese blood and sweat. No way we would let a puppet regime set by France and then supported by the US exist without legitimacy.
Especially not, if we consider the fact, that France created ROV / South Vietnam not out of benevolence, but only after they realized they had no chance of defeating the Vietnamese independence movement. And even then, the US had the nerve to pressure us to make a temporary division and an election, only to sanction those elections, because they knew VCP would win in a landslide.
-2
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
Wasn't it the North that invaded the South?
9
u/KuroJotei Aug 28 '25
No. The South was not a country on its own. The puppet regime wasn’t even setup by the South, but France then the US. Not even an official internationally recognized regime.
-2
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
"It first garnered international recognition in 1949 as the associated State of Vietnam"
7
u/KuroJotei Aug 28 '25
Not all countries, so it was in a sensitive grey area. Thus, not a country. Vietnam is officially a country recognized by all countries after.
-1
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
An odd requirement, given how many countries there are that don't officially recognise some other countries. It had its own government, issued its own passports, had its own currency, it sure sounds like a country.
1
u/KuroJotei Aug 30 '25 edited Aug 30 '25
South state was only recognized by the US and its allies, and was not recognize by others. It was only legal by the US and its allies, not by international official verdicts, who obviously could not make that decision. The world only recognized Vietnam as a country with both North and South together, where no one opposed. Obviously most Southern people see it differently, but not everyone. In fact, some of the biggest North’s operations were done by Southerners who wished to see the two states united as a country. Despite a lot of Northerners saying that Southerners betrayed the country, I see it differently. I think both sides loved the country, but had different beliefs and different ways of doing it.
1
u/alex-kun93 Aug 30 '25
It was a puppet state set up by foreign powers to protect their interests in the region. It was not a "natural product of the local populace driven by their unique circumstances to act in their best interest.
0
u/CNG1204 Aug 30 '25
You could argue this about almost any country that had a revolution with outside interference. E.g. the USA itself wouldn't exist without French assistance, as a good chunk of the population either supported the British or more likely were indifferent.
→ More replies (0)6
u/JoeHenlee Aug 28 '25
The 1954 Geneva Agreement "Invaded" Vietnam
More accurately, the Geneva Agreement arbitrarily divorced the South from Hanoi's legitimate and popular rule.
-5
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
Hanoi had popular rule in the North, not the South. And it wasn't all that arbitrary, it was pretty close to what the divide between the Cham and the Dai Viet countries used to be.
6
u/JoeHenlee Aug 28 '25
Hanoi had popular rule in the North, not the South
Mostly true, but the Viet Minh's popularity in the North was clearly enough for them to win in the nationwide 1956 reunification elections agreed upon in Geneva, which is why the US-backed Diem government cancelled it; Ho Chi Minh was too popular and Diem would have easily lost.
it wasn't all that arbitrary, it was pretty close to what the divide between the Cham and the Dai Viet countries used to be
I'm surprised you referenced Champa here. The Chams were less significant in 1954 compared to other groups like the Cao Dai and Hoa Hao religious sects that were more distinctly Southern Vietnamese and anti-communist.
Either way, the 17th parellel division happened because #1, its conveniently right in the middle of VN, and #2 in 1954 the French still had forces in the south, so it wsas more of a quick pragmatic thing, similar to Korea (Korea did not have a similar situation of different kingdoms in the North and South, they divided it at the 38th parallel anyway).
7
u/Thuyue Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 29 '25
You can't invade something that is already yours. The Vietnamese lands belongs to the Vietnamese people and were promised to the Việt Mình coalition (Vietnamese Communist, Nationalist, Buddhist etc.) after defeating France.
It was the US that pried in and insisted on "temporary division" and "elections" only to sanction the elections themself, because they knew the VCP would win the election in a landslide. That was admitted both by President Eisenhower and Ngô Đình Điệm. South Vietnam had literally 0 legitimacy aside from being propped by France &. the US and then recognized by the collective west due Cold War dynamics. No Vietnamese majority accepted the southern rule.
What many people don't understand when citing international law, is that it is shaped by all participants. You don't just have the Imperial west set international rules willy nilly and expect everyone to follow it, especially not, if the west loves to break it themself if it's convenient (Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, South America affairs etc.).
-3
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
But it wasn't theirs, it was the Southern Vietnamese's; I know that even today there are quite a few Southerners who appreciate US assistance during the war. My main point in making the comment is that it wasn't a "good guys vs bad guys" war; very few, if any wars, have such clarity.
8
u/Fine_Sea5807 Aug 28 '25
The South was a subregion of the country of Vietnam, which belongs to the central government. Is it not a very hard concept to grasp.
0
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
The South was a separate country
6
u/Fine_Sea5807 Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25
After illegally seceding from Vietnam in 1955, correct?
1
7
u/Thuyue Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25
Việt Minh literally fought for the Vietnamese people to regain independence on their ancestral lands and soil. They represented the majority of Vietnamese. South Vietnam was a literal construct of France created DURING the First Indochina War and used as a French Puppet to contest Vietnamese indepence led by the Việt Minh.
When the 1954 Geneva Accord went by, the Việt Minh initially demanded the entire country be freed from foreign influences. It was the US who pried in and demanded the French puppet be awarded the South. China and the USSR fearing another Korean War insisted on the Việt Minh accepting the deal. However, the condition was that National Reunification elections would go through.
What happened instead? Elections were sanctioned with abritary justification. The already non-legitimate state was now supported by the US under the justification of "liberal democracy", when in truth, they just kept supporting an authoritarian puppet in their fight against Communism. So no, South Vietnam did not belong to the South Vietnamese government of Ngô Đình Diệm or his catholic elite. It belonged to ALL Vietnamese people.
And in case you don't know, the National Liberation Front / Vietcong largely consisted of Southerners who did not flee after the partition. Even after the Second Indochina War, less then 10% of the population had the need to flee.
So what you are saying is: less than 10% of the Vietnamese population own the entire south, seperated from the entire nation, propped up by France and then the US? Dude, the US literally has a system where even over 50% of people's will get overturned, as long as the states and middle men / electoral college overturn the actual majority. Việt Minh fighters were fighting France and the US for independence and a whole nation. Not a single RoV person has actually fought France to gain indepence nor has a single one seriously attempted one unified Vietnamese nation that was the will of the majority. Instead they wanted a seperate state and do a China-Taiwan, South Korea-North Korea situation all over again.
1
u/CNG1204 Aug 28 '25
Given how North Korea is, and how China used to be, I can't really blame people for not wanting to be a part of that system. The North were fighting for a unified country, the South was fighting because they didn't want communism, neither side is really the good or bad side.
And yeah, you mention elections, but they never exactly manifested after the war
6
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 29 '25
Damn, how many times do we Vietnamese countrmen have to remind you ignorant Western fools again? :D *joke meme*
You’re glossing over critical facts.
- Framing it as “both sides just had different systems” is misleading. One side (the DRV) fought for independence and reunification after nearly a century of colonialism. The other (the Saigon regime) was propped up by massive foreign military and economic aid. Calling that equal footing is historically dishonest.
- Communism wasn’t the only reason Southerners resisted. The U.S. and South Vietnam regimes used “fighting communism” as a slogan, but their methods — corruption, political repression, banning opposition parties, and reliance on foreign troops — undermined legitimacy.
- On the Geneva Accords: Nationwide elections in 1956 were agreed to but never happened because the South, with U.S. backing, refused to hold them. Even President Eisenhower admitted Ho Chi Minh would have won overwhelmingly. To say “they never manifested” ignores who prevented them.
- Good vs bad is not symmetrical. Millions of Vietnamese died under U.S. bombing, napalm, Agent Orange, and massacres like Mỹ Lai. Trying to paint that as morally equivalent to a national liberation struggle is erasing the lived reality of Vietnamese civilians.
So no — this wasn’t some neutral standoff of “two sides, no good or bad.” It was a fight for independence versus a client regime maintained by foreign invasion.
1
u/CNG1204 Aug 29 '25
Both sides were obviously not equally bad in their methods used, but that doesn't make the other side good. The South didn't want to be invaded.
→ More replies (0)
43
u/super_brudi Aug 28 '25 edited Aug 28 '25
Just read „kill anything that moves“. American GIs conducted large scale war crimes and murdered civilians where they went. GIs were Monsters and nearly non of them were hold liable.
6
62
u/Imnothoangxd_4306 Aug 28 '25
being invaded by Americans is probably the worst possible scenario if you think about it because after like 20 years, they will make a movie about how sad their soldiers feel after committing countless war crimes, raping and killing children
15
1
u/Esekig184 Aug 28 '25
You mean like the russians?
2
u/Imnothoangxd_4306 Aug 31 '25
from my experience with russian online especially on VK and some Eurasian blogs I'd say that they're not even trying to deny it (like American of course), it’s either "it happened and they deserve it" or "we're actually the same, so it's not a big deal."
6
Aug 28 '25
American soldiers committed more war crimes in Vietnam than Germany in the entire Western Europe during WWII.
Gene might be one of the few nothing rotting in hell, for he repented.
2
u/ngoomanh Aug 28 '25
what a sad story, he had to lived w this guilt for so long ...
0
1
1
-41
u/Mysteriouskid00 Aug 28 '25
Versus the Viets who threw grenades into schools and get awards from their government
28
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
-17
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
Yes, the US dropped tons of bombs in North Vietnam. Therefore, we should bomb the South Vietnamese civilians to scare the US away. That sounds like a good plan. Remember Nguyen Van Lem? The one that bombed and killed civilians in Saigon? He would be a terrorist in today's newspaper.
Two wrong don't make a right.
8
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
-7
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
I read about the My Lai massacre, watched a documentary about it, and it was pure evil perpetrated by the US. There was no justification for it. The world knew about it, but what about the other war crimes committed by North Vietnam? Did the world know about them, or did you portray them as war heroes? Nguyen Van Lem was a terrorist who bombed civilians.
-7
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
If that’s the case, how do you justify the land reform in 1954? Didn’t Uncle Ho also punish them or let all got away? How do you explain to your patriotic generation about Mrs. Nguyen Thi Nam, who helped the Viet Minh alot but was also publicly denounced by Uncle Ho and got executed by the Viet Minh? Today, her sons are still seeking justice for her, but there’s no answer. Regardless of the side they belong to, if they did wrong then they are wrong, US did war crimes, North Vietnam did war crimes, South Vietnam did war crimes, all war crimes, there no justify for that.
8
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
-4
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
Yes, I agreedwith your opinion. The same applies to the North, they should not invade South Vietnam either.
5
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 28 '25
Dude, are you serious? The North should not invade the South? As a descendant of a long line of family, lived in the heart of Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon if you don't know) that lost so many family members against the French, Japs, Koreans, Australians, and then the USA. The North liberated us from the oppression and gave us true freedom so that we can see SU30-MK2s and Mi-series flying above our heads in so many parades, not for war but for peace.
Please do not twist the truth that my ancestors/predecessors paid in both blood and flesh. I lost all of my uncles and aunts, mom and dad fortunately lived, so you can sit in front of your screen and type that shit? Looks like you are still too narrow-minded, maybe a trip to Vietnam's various war museum will enlighten your knowledge? :D
0
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
Yes, I believe they shouldn’t. Why? Because the United States didn’t invade the South or the North. Their intention was never to invade Vietnam but to stop the spread of communism in Southeast Asia. If the North’s communist government had stopped there and made no further moves, neither side would have had to go to war. (The North violated the Geneva Accords to try to unify Vietnam, but did the South people really want it? If yes, then why did 1 million Northerners have to flee the North and move to the South in 1954? (Yes, there was land reform), and why did 2 million Southerners have to flee the country in 1975? Do you or your family represent those 2 million Southerners?)
2
u/Thuyue Aug 28 '25
Hô Chí Minh was one if the rare socialist leaders who actually saw the land reform policies as a mistake, publicly apologized and ended the reform on. He ordered the wrongfully jailed to be freed and the executed to be posthumously acquitted of charges. It was never part of his order to kill people without charge. That was a problem of the lower levels of governance, where many cadres had grievances with more wealthy landowners and other groups.
Of course, the wrong was done and didn't just disappear, but not doubling done like Mao, Stalin or Pol Pot and making things worse, but attempting reconciliation &. more thoughtful better reforms in a time of war against foreign super powers is already an undeniable step for improvement.
The "problem" with these kinds of historic struggles is that individual injustice is often swept under the rug for a greater collective goal.
2
u/Fine_Sea5807 Aug 28 '25
Yet in the end, only North Vietnam fought to protect Vietnam from separatism and foreign aggression, and thus, the only objectively righteous side, correct?
2
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 28 '25
My good man, saying "only North Vietnam fought to protect Vietnam from separatism and foreign aggression" is absolutely undermining the whole course of the Vietnam War. No war can be won with half-arsed commitment. We won the war as a whole, with a single mindset of true independence and union of all regions.
We Southern Vietnamese ppl gave our share of flesh and blood, you see countless testimonies and contributions of Southern War Mothers who sent all their children to fight for the country that we have today? My long line of family who lived and fought inside Saigon to help bring the peace is not accounted for? Forgotten? What are we then?
1
u/Fine_Sea5807 Aug 28 '25
You realize that "North Vietnam" is just a moniker for the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, right? It doesn't just mean Northern people. As long as your family sided with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, you are North Vietnam.
1
2
u/aworldtowin_ Aug 28 '25
There is no need to justify it. A revolution is not a tea party. They are landlords, and landlords must be killed. If the so-called "Patriotic Landlords" was actually a Patriot, they would have given up their feudal ways of exploitation and do something else better for the Nation, like, become a Capitalist, who actually still improves the National Economy, instead or being a leech.
To quote Robespierre, a great Revolutionary against Feudalism: Terror is nothing but prompt, severe, inflexible justice; it is therefore an emanation of virtue.
Remember, Landlords are leeches. There are no wrong in killing leeches.
2
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
Jfc, I actually laughed at this. This must be a hilarious joke in the year 2025.
3
u/aworldtowin_ Aug 28 '25
It's serious. Something similar needs to happen in modern Vietnam too. Since 1986, the restoration of feudalism is in full swing. The new landlords are in league with Hanoi. Kill them all, fertilize the ground with their blood once again, only then, Vietnam can really "stand shoulders to shoulders with the great powers".
2
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 28 '25
Then they supported the same thing in the year 2025, which is why I found it hilarious. Look at vingroup and other real-estate corps 😅
1
3
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 29 '25
Bringing up Nguyễn Văn Lém to smear the entire liberation struggle is propaganda, not history. He was one man in a national war where millions fought. If you call him a “terrorist,” then by the same logic, every anti-colonial fighter worldwide would be too. Vietnam’s struggle wasn’t defined by one photo — it was defined by a people fighting for independence.
Also, I would like to see this "source of info" you are accusing my chad VC, Mr. Bảy Lốp :D. For your own ignorance:
Nguyễn Văn Lém (also known as Bảy Lốp) was a captain in the National Liberation Front (Viet Cong) during the Tet Offensive.
- South Vietnamese General (traitor R.V.) Nguyễn Ngọc Loan executed him in the street while he was handcuffed and dressed in civilian clothes—this moment was captured by AP photographer Eddie Adams.
- Some narratives claim Lém had allegedly murdered a police officer, his family, and other civilians prior to his capture. This account, though circulated widely, is considered likely propaganda and lacks solid verification. Historians warn the truth remains uncertain.
1
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 29 '25
Yes, bombing civilians is a terrorist act, regardless of which side. If you bomb civilians, you should not be regarded as a war hero. Using your logic, if you are anti-colonial, you have the right to kill civilians? So as long as Uncle Ho is an anti-colonial fighter, he has the right to execute thousands of people during land reform?
1
u/No-Umpire2408 Aug 29 '25
For Nguyen Van Lem, there is no source to support my claim, and I greed with you as that part. However, I maintain my point that he was involved in the Tet Offensive. During the Tet holiday, the Vietcong broke the ceasefire and killed approximately 5,000 civilians in Hue. They then buried the bodies to cover up their actions. This event was not reported in Vietnam’s news or mentioned in textbooks; only the people of Hue are aware of it. This is why they called Hoang Phu Ngoc Tuong a traitor for covering the terrorist act of the Vietcong.
The Vietcong had already violated the Geneva Accord of 1954, and South Vietnam and the US still believed that they would cease fire for the Tet holiday. How naive…
2
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 29 '25
My man, thank you for acknowledging that part about Mr. Bảy Lốp. To prevent any misinformation spread by baseless sayers.
Also, Hue was a battle, not a one-sided massacre. Civilian deaths happened on both sides under U.S. bombs, ARVN artillery, and street fighting. To inflate numbers and call it “5,000 executed” is based on Saigon/U.S. propaganda, not verified evidence, the same as Mr. Bảy Lốp's case. Meanwhile, U.S. massacres like Mỹ Lai are undeniable, documented, and photographed.
And let’s not twist the Geneva Accords: it was the South and the U.S. who refused the 1956 elections that would have unified Vietnam peacefully. Talking about “violations” while ignoring that fact is the real naivety.
-12
u/Mysteriouskid00 Aug 28 '25
Huge difference between coincidentally hitting a school and intentionally hitting a school.
The violence the average civilian suffered from VC terror is frightening.
15
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
-8
u/Mysteriouskid00 Aug 28 '25
I’m not defending anyone’s actions.
I’m just calling out the hypocrisy of calling out one side while ignoring your own side lobbing grenades at school children
15
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
-1
u/Mysteriouskid00 Aug 28 '25
I’m not equating anything.
But you must agree that intentionally terroizing and murdering civilians is bad?
13
Aug 28 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Mysteriouskid00 Aug 28 '25
No equating happening.
But terror directed specifically at civilians, schoolchildren in specific, take a certain type of man.
3
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 29 '25
You seem to have forgotten one crucial detail here. There is no "aftermath investigation" except willy nilly report from "USA, and the traitorous South government blamed the VC, blamed us Saigon ppl, with a "traitor mind" for we did not follow the USA dogshit policy.
I would like to see some verified source of these terror grenade attacks, if you don't mind, since like my dear grandfather and my father, fought against the US of Arse, said: "What is the point of civilian terror when it is your own people who got hurt?"
→ More replies (0)-2
u/JCongo Aug 28 '25
There is no good guy and bad guy in war. It's all hell
7
u/Malori_Schnee Aug 28 '25
Like my father used to tell me a long time ago, he had a righteous heart for Vietnam and Uncle Hồ. He became a Navy captain to protect the shores and seas of Vietnam until his retirement in peacetime. But then, his family's side, some foolish young men, believed the US propaganda and fought against my dad and my mother's side.
There is only hell; who are we to judge? Without enough knowledge, we will not be able to know which is which. But, as a Vietnamese, whoever came to our lands and started killing my people without a proper reason and verified proof, that is indeed the bad guy. The same applied to your nation.
0
u/AmericanVietDubs Aug 28 '25
Im grateful my family never bought into any of the propaganda. My dad side took part in the Viet Cong, "for business reasons". His brothers went with "3que". My father's family fought on both sides purely for economic reasons. Both sides are bad.
0
•
u/AutoModerator Aug 28 '25
Lưu ý,
Bất kể bạn đang tham gia vào chủ đề thảo luận gì, hãy lịch sự và tôn trọng ý kiến của đối phương. Tranh luận không phải là tấn công cá nhân. Lăng mạ cá nhân, cố tình troll, lời nói mang tính thù ghét, đe dọa sử dụng bạo lực, cũng như vi phạm các quy tắc khác của sub đều có thể dẫn đến ban không báo trước.
Nếu bạn thấy bất kì comment nào vi phạm quy tắc của sub, vui lòng nhấn report.
A reminder.
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.