50 years after end of Vietnam War, chaotic embassy evacuation still pains many
Through April 1975, military helicopters evacuated South Vietnamese orphan children and then, on April 29, the U.S. Embassy in Saigon in a scene of rooftop chaos and desperation that millions of Americans witnessed on their living room TVs.
The moment has faded from memory for many Americans, if they were ever actually aware of it, and even if they were of a requisite level of awareness, they may have forgotten. It was, after all, half a century ago – exactly half a century.
The last U.S. military units had left Vietnam two years before, leaving the South Vietnamese Army to defend what was left. In over a decade of fighting, some 58,000 U.S. troops had been killed, along with 200,000 South Vietnamese troops and more than a million North Vietnamese soldiers and Viet Cong irregulars. Civilian deaths approached 2 million.
The war had divided the U.S. like no other conflict since the Civil War. And now it was ending before our eyes in televised pandemonium.
Louie Vega, a semi-retired Kern County Superior Court judge, was a door gunner on an Army attack helicopter.
'I'm glad I wasn't there' at the U.S. Embassy, Vega said. 'I just can't imagine feeling that impending doom. And trying to get out of there, and trying to be the last person out of there alive and hearing the explosions of the oncoming North Vietnamese Army. It was chaos. … The last unit, the Embassy guards, they were stranded at the top of a roof and they weren't sure they were going to get out of there alive. So, it was sad. It was sad to see what the war had come to. And all the money that we put into it. All the material, all the guys that lost their lives.'
Ed Budney was a visual combat tracker wounded four times on a mission four months into his deployment – twice by enemy fire, twice by friendly fire. The war's ignominious end stays with him.
'Did we lose it?' he said. 'I think we all knew we couldn't win. We weren't attacked. It's not like a 9/11 where we had to retaliate. Or World War II where we had to retaliate. We went in there of our own free mind. Did we win? I don't know.'
A sense of relief tempered the frustration for opponents of the war. Eddy Laine participated in protests.
'Finally,' Laine said. 'Finally. It was a demonstration of the poor decision making that our country engaged in for years and years about going into Vietnam and about continuing in Vietnam and the effect it had on human lives.'
For protestor Verda Varner, it was some vindication to go with the sorrow.
'Our generation then was cannon fodder for a useless war that we had to stop,' she said, 'and so we took to the streets and we stopped it.'
Randa Hunter, who grew up in a conservative Bakersfield family, saw the carnage as clearly as might be possible for a 19 year old girl.'We thought the government knew what it was doing,' she said. 'Stopping Communism.'
Seven years later was the chaotic pullout.
'I thought of the soldiers that were left in Afghanistan and the screaming and yelling in the States,' she said, 'and I thought, 'Well I continue to play back what happened when we left Vietnam.' If you want to see chaos. If you want to see families taking airplanes, begging to get on a plane, throwing their kids onto a C5-1A cargo plane to get out of there, or taking helicopters and pushing them off aircraft carriers 'cause they didn't have any room, that's chaos and that was abandonment.'
Hunter said we need to appreciate history.
'Look at the mistakes that have happened. Let's not repeat them,' she said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Gabbard slashing intelligence office workforce, cutting budget by more than $700 million
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Office of the Director of National Intelligence will dramatically reduce its workforce and cut its budget by more than $700 million annually, the Trump administration announced Wednesday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said in a statement, 'Over the last 20 years, ODNI has become bloated and inefficient, and the intelligence community is rife with abuse of power, unauthorized leaks of classified intelligence, and politicized weaponization of intelligence.' She said the intelligence community 'must make serious changes to fulfill its responsibility to the American people and the U.S. Constitution by focusing on our core mission: find the truth and provide objective, unbiased, timely intelligence to the President and policymakers.' The reorganization is part of a broader administration effort to rethink its evaluation of foreign threats to American elections, a topic that has become politically loaded given President Donald Trump's long-running resistance to the intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered on his behalf in the 2016 election. In February, for instance, Attorney General Pam Bondi disbanded an FBI task force focused on investigating foreign influence operations, including those that target U.S. elections. The Trump administration also has made sweeping cuts at the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which oversees the nation's critical infrastructure, including election systems. Gabbard's efforts to downsize the agency she leads is in keeping with the cost-cutting mandate the administration has employed since its earliest days, when Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency oversaw mass layoffs of the federal workforce. It's the latest headline-making move by a key official who just a few months ago had seemed out of favor with Trump over her analysis of Iran's nuclear capabilities but who in recent weeks has emerged as a key loyalist. She's released a series of documents meant to call into question the legitimacy of the intelligence community's findings on Russian election interference in 2016, and this week, at Trump's direction, revoked the security clearances of 37 current and former government officials. The ODNI in the past has joined forces with other federal agencies to debunk and alert the public to foreign disinformation intended to influence U.S. voters. For example, it was involved in an effort to raise awareness about a Russian video that falsely depicted mail-in ballots being destroyed in Pennsylvania that circulated widely on social media in the weeks before the 2024 presidential election. Notably, Gabbard said she would be refocusing the priorities of the Foreign Malign Influence Center, which her office says on its website is 'focused on mitigating threats to democracy and U.S. national interests from foreign malign influence.' It wasn't clear from Gabbard's release or fact sheet exactly what the changes would entail, but Gabbard noted its 'hyper-focus' on work tied to elections and said the center was 'used by the previous administration to justify the suppression of free speech and to censor political opposition.' The Biden administration created the Foreign Malign Influence Center in 2022, responding to what the U.S. intelligence community had assessed as attempts by Russia and other adversaries to interfere with American elections. Its role, ODNI said when it announced the center's creation, was to coordinate and integrate intelligence pertaining to malign influence. In a briefing given to reporters in 2024, ODNI officials said they only notified candidates, political organizations and local election offices of disinformation operations when they could be attributed to foreign sources. They said they worked to avoid any appearance of policing Americans' speech. Sen. Tom Cotton, the Republican chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, hailed the decision to broadly revamp ODNI, saying it would make it a 'stronger and more effective national security tool for President Trump.'


Miami Herald
16 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Can you prove to Trump you're not anti-American? An (absurd) immigration checklist
The Trump administration's announcement Wednesday that immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship and other benefits will be screened to determine whether they have displayed anti-American ideas or behavior is problematic to say the least. Who gets to decide what exactly is anti-American? And that got us thinking. If U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents are the ones deciding whether you stay or go, what will they be considering? Is the applicant's social media free of rainbows? Come on in. Do they have preferred pronouns? The exit is that way. What about the person's car — is it (more or less) American made? A positive sign. Yes, this is a serious matter. But measuring anti-American-ness? That's a joke. U.S. immigration officers have always used their discretion to award citizenship and other benefits to people born outside the country. It's unclear what will actually change under the updated immigration policy manual, though 'Anti-American activity will be an overwhelmingly negative factor in any discretionary analysis,' U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services wrote in a Tuesday news release. The guidelines target 'anti-American ideologies' but don't describe what they are, which is the problem. That will be in the eyes of the beholder — and the beholder being the Trump administration, we can imagine how that might turn out. Given that the new guidance also includes 'social media vetting,' we encourage officers to print out the following checklist, which we're sure will please the president and his top aide/anti-immigration zealot Stephen Miller: Does this future patriot drive a truck that does no more than 5 mpg of beautiful fossil fuel? Approve. Did the wannabe American show up to the immigration interview in a Prius or electrical vehicle? (Please consult your supervisor regarding the status of Tesla, as the president and Elon Musk may still patch things up.) Deny. Send applicants straight to Alligator Alcatraz if they rode a bike, because this is America, not the future model citizen spotted at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021? Approve. Has this ungrateful person posted anything complaining about the cost of groceries since Jan. 20, 2025 — because 'inflation is down to a perfect, beautiful number,' the president has to constantly remind us? Deny. Does this soon-to-be great American thank the president every day for protecting us from mail ballots, windmills, foreign invaders and paper straws? Approve — immediately. With this list, USCIS officers will be sure to ensure that whoever is allowed in the country has pledged their allegiance not only to America but to a particular ideology that the president has decided is the only one acceptable. Whoever disagrees should not be granted the privilege of American citizenship, does not belong in the Smithsonian museums or in the federal government, especially if they will produce any jobs reports that make Trump's economy look bad. And if you find the above list absurd, it's because it is meant to be. These are, in fact, absurd times.


Newsweek
18 minutes ago
- Newsweek
How Prices for Common Groceries Have Changed Since Trump Took Office
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Since President Donald Trump took office in January, grocery prices at the national level have remained elevated and, in many categories, are rising even further. Federal forecasts and multiple price trackers show continuing inflation for common items such as eggs and beef, and the USDA Economic Research Service projected overall food prices will increase over the remainder of this year and 2026. Why It Matters Food represents a large and visible share of household spending, and high grocery bills influence public perceptions of the economy and the administration's performance. A mid-2025 poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that a majority of Americans reported stress over grocery costs, and retailers have reported shoppers shifting purchases toward cheaper brands and smaller sizes. Roughly 53 percent of respondents said grocery costs were a "major" stressor. Vegetables on display in a grocery store on August 15 in Delray Beach, Florida. Vegetables on display in a grocery store on August 15 in Delray Beach, To Know Trump campaigned on promises of lowering grocery costs, but federal forecasts and private trackers showed only modest easing overall and price gains in several food staples. The USDA Economic Research Service reported that the all-food Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose 0.3 percent from May to June and was 3 percent higher than June 2024. It also projected overall food prices would rise 2.9 percent this year and 2.7 percent in 2026. "Most headlines lean on 'core CPI,' which excludes food and energy," Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group and host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. "That's fine for economists, but for real households, those are the two biggest non-discretionary expenses. So when they say prices are 'stabilizing,' it leaves out the areas where people actually feel it the most." The exact price increases vary by grocery item. NBC News' grocery-price tracker showed eggs, chicken and beef remained higher year-over-year in the most recent update. While eggs were up 64 cents, chicken cost 81 cents more and beef had seen an increase of 67 cents. The USDA projected egg prices to have strong volatility, with a 24.6 percent change forecast for 2025, and beef and veal prices were anticipated to rise substantially, 8.8 percent, this year. "The reality is that inflation is weighted across categories," Thompson said. "If your personal diet leans heavy on protein, beef, chicken, coffee, or soda, you've likely felt double-digit increases while the official number is closer to 3 percent. Everyone's 'personal inflation' is different, and for many it feels far higher than the reported average." Trump previously warned of short-term effects from trade policy, saying, "We may have, short term, a little pain." What People Are Saying Trump said during his campaign: "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on Day One." Thompson also told Newsweek: "Tariffs during Trump's presidency did raise costs on imported goods, and new tariffs under the current administration are continuing that trend. Immigration policy does have some effect on labor costs in agriculture and food processing, but the bigger driver of food prices has been weather, disease, and global supply chain issues not immigration directly." Alex Beene, financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "All of the inflationary pressures that were in place prior to 2025 have largely remained the same, with some everyday items actually going higher in price, if only incrementally so. The prevailing problem is the pricing structure on many consumer goods is formed through a domino effect which includes costs of production, shipping, stocking, and everything in between. "In order for prices to go lower, not only do you have to have falling demand, but also the series of transactions that make it ready to buy have to trend lower in order for businesses to continue to generate a profit. Until this happens, we're going to continue to see higher costs." What Happens Next The USDA ERS forecasts and monthly CPI releases from the Bureau of Labor Statistics will remain primary sources to measure whether grocery prices fall back, stabilize or resume faster growth in coming months. Since Trump's tariffs have gone into effect, the higher costs will likely be passed down to the consumer, Thompson said: "Businesses may absorb some costs in the short term, but over time those costs show up in the checkout line. The current tariff environment has raised the baseline market price, which means U.S. producers can charge more too, capturing extra margins. "Going forward, unless there's a consistent and predictable tariff policy, shoppers should expect continued price volatility. Once markets adjust to a clear set of rules, prices may stabilize, but likely at a higher level than before."