To mark the 40th anniversary of the release of this
song relating to Australia's involvement in the Vietnam
war, the recording by Redgum, has been reworked. 

Redgum's lead vocalist-guitarist, John Schumann,
wrote the song based on experiences he heard from
veterans including his brother in-law.

     This song has a special emotional significance for
     me, and I must admit to being a little disappointed
     with this 2023, reworked and re-recorded version...

    

It's "nice" but has lost the subtle emotional depths of the
original—partly because, I think, of overproduction(?). 
Schumann still emotes as per the original, but the addition
of Donna Simpson's opening, vocals (as she sings about her
father), spoils it.

     This is the original version...

    

As far as I'm concerned, there was no need to change
the original, as it's stood the test of time, and with a
special significance—especially to former diggers—who
are all in their 70s by now... or deceased.

There's also a couple of errors in the lyrics.  Anybody notice?

Evil always exists where you least expect it. 

I think the Herd Cover is much better.
Why? Because it's 'different' in the right way.

As is the slow-soft cover version by Sydney Watson.
This is the essence of Covering, unlike Tribute Bands who replicate the original down to a tee.

Schumann has basically 'Woked' his own song.
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=+i+was+only+19+by+sydney+wa...

I think Schumann's Strine accent has taken that song far.
The Strine accent has more or less dissapeared from the cities and I only hear it occassionally the closer one gets to the Red Centre and mostly from rich Cockies, educated Researchers, Surveyors, etc.

If you look at the international 'reviewers' listening to that song for the first time. It's his accent that always captivates them above and beyond the song itself.

Strine - its a dying breed.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:20am:



Are you still pretending to be a Vietnam Veteran on this thread?

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:34am:



That's not an answer.

And me? I'm not a Vietnam Veteran. I was born after the war.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:44am:



So you are still pretending you are a Vietnam Vet?

So that's a 'yes' then?

Thought so.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:20am:

When John Schumann ⁠wrote the song he went to great lengths to ensure he had the approval of ex-Vietnam vets before he performed the song publicly or recorded it.

The story, as he tells it, was that he played it to senior vets at a remote location in Australia giving his assurance that he would take their advice on lyrics or, if they didn't like the song, he would not record it or perform it publicly at all.

As it turned out, they not only liked it, they insisted that Schumann record it and perform it publicly.

mothra's gone again!  Poor soul - always was too high strung to be in that hot kitchen playing chess with pigeons...

I did notice the reference to 'remote areas' or similar.....  how many Diggers live in 'remote areas'?  That sounds a bit strange to me.... explanation required...

History changing to suit a new narrative - all were asked if they would go and those who said YES went.

Modern generation out of touch.

Great song no matter who sings it

Only the those with doctrines in victimology would cry about it being re released .... cue crappler

Aussie wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 5:58pm:


have you covered the mirrors in your place?

mothra wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:49am:


Trying to denigrate Vietnam vets is really poor form!

You see - no Nasho was nineteen - a few guys who enlisted at a young age were.... more than one such was killed... but Nashos were all 20+.

1971 that Brian referenced the war was winding down... had been since 1969 when the US decided to hand it over to the ARVN, though 1968 had the highest number of US casualties after that decision had been taken - just sorting the place out to hand over cost them many more than the first three years or so, and Oz fought the NVA at Coral/Balmoral.  Bloke I know was in the last 6RAR company in the joint and they had some ferocious battles in 1972.

The Strine originates from the Irish speaking Irish that came here both as Convict and Free Settler (the one with gun to shoot all the 'helpless' indigenous inhabitants here on a whim). The Engish probably look 'down' on the Australian accents as uncouth. Just cultural cliche from a part of the world 'back there in the past' and even further back is America - where the West (Politics) is just a resurrection of the past. Britain will never die. It will just 'reclaim' America as its own. Britain, unlike Germany, France & Italy - will past the test and fade into the West (America) where it belongs.

Now Vietnam. How can one respect a load of Mercenaries going from here to go fight Yellow people in their own countries upon the whim of the most 'invasive' nation on the planet? Real poor form from Australians.
The Democrats (Unionists) may have Won a 'domestic civil war' (Civilian War?) against the Confederates. But Internationally they must be defeated for their blatant RACISM (RACE WAR) against Yellow Peoples. No wonder those Yellow People in Asia are 'up in arms' as if fearing ANOTHER invasion. The Democrats must hang! Let alone stay out of Taiwan.
Until America can prove itself to use PEACE, which is what Politics is for and not use WAR at the start of a RACE WAR gun. It must 'change'.

I noticed though from many stories and behaviours and experience personal views from those who volunteered to go and INVADE and those who were dragged by thugs to be thrown into it. Forced to 'murder' and 'kill' Yellow People because America wanted them dead because of their political difference and the desire to improve their part of the world as they see fit to it.
The 'Vibe' was that there were those who fought like American Soldiers and took the loss (failure) as a shame along with the Public opinion that they were a shame to the country in the first place for going in the first place. Real cliche 'victimhood' - but ironically a 'justified' one as well. As the 'People' REJECTED THEM in so many ways for their 'transgression' on another part of the world. But hey, lower the rank in the Military (in the Northern Hemsphere) the greater the 'victim-hood'.
Desert Storm, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan - these were all based upon 'retaliation' upon America being attacked. That's justified.

Then there are the other Vietnam Vets. Who didn't buy into that Victimhood. They hated Yellow people in a different way. A more 'cautious and fearful' manner as if not going to take the chance - to lose! No shame from them apparently.

It was like proud Ron Casey taking out the bigger 'Victimhood' Normie Rowe in a punch up. That's the difference between a very 'political' Ron Casey and Musician Normie Rowe (songs of victimhood like a broken Confederate).

So you see, there are as different views about the Vietnam Rules (War), not America.

Now the Vietnamese get revenge. Go to Cabramatta Train Station and others around Sydney and its all the same. All the White Junkies hanging on the platforms, I counted 30. Doing what Junkies do best... die. Yellow invasion turning Whities all around Sydney into Zombies (or Homosexuals).
All the white junkie chicks are ho's for the Yellow Dick.
Vietnamese have drugs in both pockets.
The 'dead' pill is for the Whities.
Most don't wake up in the morning.

ANZAC was based on WW1 & 2.
And associated more with Britain, than fighting for America.
These Wars 'for America' - a servitude mercenary murder show of force. Sardaukhars.
So I don't think any Wars Australia has been involved with after the World War, has been anything remotely 'ANZAC' in its actions.
They're best called things like 300 Spartans, Sardaukhar and other 'Hollywood' names they now name themselves with.
Better to serve a KING, than another KNIGHT.
That is the Holy Grail.

Fu_ck Vietnam and Fu_ck America.
Fu_ck you Lancelot.
Percival.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:45pm:


And Frankie was going home in June 1970.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:53pm:

Was he?

The point of the lyric was that he was almost set to go home - a year later doesn't cut it.

The lyric could have been: 'he should've been home in June'.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:54pm:


You need to provide evidence.

Get back to me when you can   

Again: no year is mentioned.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:56pm:

The mood of the song includes the urgency of the moment.

Going home in June of the next year meant he had 11 long months to step on mines (when every step could be your last one on two legs).

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:56pm:


HAHAHA!
Meister Eccy just headbutted Peccary who doesn't have any 'evidence' himself to back his own claim, by asking Meister Eccy to provide 'evidence' instead for his. Peccary lost!!! 

Jasin wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:02pm:


The onus is on Meister to prove his initial claim that "Some of the song lyrics use poetic license".

Thus far, he has been unable to do so.

Therefore, I accept his white flag.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:03pm:

Not from what I hear.
And when it comes to 'accents', I can trust better to what I 'hear', than read.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:05pm:

HAHAHA!!!
Meister Eccy just kicked Peccary's butt. 

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:05pm:

Do you even know what poetic license is?

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:55pm:

You forfeited your first claim to question Peccary by providing this highlighted sentence as your 'counterclaim' to it being based on the 'year' specifically.
In other words Peccary, you asked then forfeited (before he answered it) it by 'FLINCHING' by putting forth your 'answer' (in regards to it being based on year) as to why you originally 'disagree' - so therefore, you have to cough it up first. 

I got lost as pfuk riding around looking for the Long Tan location, that was in 2001 before it was clearly sign posted. Pretty sure I found the rubber plantation tho.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:10pm:


Your white flag has already been accepted in good faith.

You made an honest mistake - that's fine.

Continuing to push the issue is only making you look worse.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:15pm:


And the year, month and day he was going home?



White flag accepted, folded, and put away.

Thank you for playing.

Jasin wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:15pm:

The Abroad Australian accent is a bit like Shakespeare's English when it is spoken in the accent of 16th-century London - which was a melting pot of accents - every English speaker of the Anglosphere outside the UK and Ireland can recognise their own accent in it.

The broad Australian accent (strine) began as a compromise of multiple UK and Irish regional accents.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 7:02pm:


I accept your acknowledgement that you were wrong, Graps.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...

But way more Irish than English (or Scottish, or Welsh).
Sorry - but this is where the Irish accent dominated more so, in was known as Strine. Sorry, but the English lost and became inferior in this one. 

What is remarkable about 'strine is that all Australians understand it, despite where they hail from.  South Australians are reputed to speak with a close to an English accent.  WA speakers speak with an accept closer to the classic 'strine accent, mixed with a fair degree of Englishness and South African accents.  Queenslanders speak with a classic 'strine accent.  Victorians speak with a close to an English/Irish accent.

The British and Irish settlers of New Holland/Australia were proud of the compromise accent they'd quickly developed to overcome the scores of regional-accent intelligibility among them.

They thought they'd devised the perfect accentless English pronunciation!!

I'll agree with the above.
It's obvious I have to accept there is more than just one right answer.

Young men (no women!) had to register in the first or
second six months of the year dependent on their date
of birth.

EG: 
Born (say) 19 April = register in previous January;
Born (say) 19 October = register in previous July.

Which meant—due to recruit and corps training, and
specialist job training times, no National Serviceman in
Vietnam was "only 19"—all were at least 20, and some
were 25.

And no National Service man was "forced" into a posting
to Vietnam.  The ADF much preferred nashos who had
a desire to go rather than those who didn't want to
be there from day one.

And there was no shortage of Vietnam volunteers among
the nashos.  A lot of young blokes wanted the tax-free
income and zone allowance, and the low interest home
loans.  And of course the free piss and cigs were another
incentive for a single bloke.    As were the Saigon bar girls!

AusGeoff wrote on Dec 9^th, 2023 at 4:17am:

I found at least one soldier - killed in the Battle of Long Tsn - Private Francis B Topp - he was only 19.

Private Francis Brett Topp, 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, was from Helidon in Queensland. He and his cousin were educated at Downlands College, Toowoomba. He was killed in action during the Battle of Long Tan in Phuoc Tuy on 18th August 1966, Aged 19.

https://monumentaustralia.org.au/themes/people/military/display/110205-private-f...

A better song would have been : I was only a Civilian

AusGeoff wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 1:33am:


The most viscerally powerful song ever written in Australia. Every word packs a gut punch. This song never fails to bring tears, even if you weren't there.

This song shows the power of words and music like no one ever truly has before. You don't need to sing it, just say it. Speak the truth. Tell it like it was. Be specific.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 8^th, 2023 at 8:08pm:

I never said anything regarding that to be the case.
Why the jump to a conclusion for want of asking me first?

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 9^th, 2023 at 12:44pm:

The song is about Schumann's brother-in-law (Denny's brother), Mick Storen, who volunteered to go to Vietnam.

As Schumann tells it, from what Storen told him, was that there were five volunteers required for Vietnam with the 6RAR and Storen's Sargeant asked for them.

He received more than five volunteers so they drew cards to determine who the five would be (hence the lyric 'it was me who drew the card').

Schumann does not say Storen was only 19, so it's probably safe to assume he was at least 20.

Good post Bias.

Yes. The Military seduces the young because they are naive and gullible to the lies of their new Masters. Propaganda lies and deceits to prey upon the young to this world.

Better and more honourable to a Military would be to recruit more maturer and older males and females to fight for them. Hell, look at the type of warfare being fought now: no need for 'strength & fitness' but intelligence and life experiences.
Throw in the moral fact that 'young people' have not 'lived' yet in raising kids, business, etc - they have not 'matured' in life. All those young men, who probably haven't experienced 'love' yet - all wasted away as fodder for the Generals who aren't physically tough enough to fight it out among themselves in a Gladiator to the death arena.

If the Military were going to get Politics to just sign a few documents to endorse Enslavement of Civilians and young ones at that. Then they really should be 'stealing' people from the mature spectrum of ages - who have 'lived a life' to some degree and they might even prove to be superior in what they have been enslaved for.

The Military here is still so very 'primitive' in its ways.
Hell, can't even build its own Submarines. 

Nihon had no intention to invade Australia.
It knew it was no threat to it - alone.
But it did give Australia a kick up the arse for helping its more threatening enemies it was in conflict with directly.
Nothing more than propaganda paranoia from the American point of view.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 10^th, 2023 at 1:06pm:


*SIGH* One of the great myths of World War II again rears it's ugly head again.  Japan was incapable of invading Australia.  Australia was basically too far from Japan's bases and the Japanese had no understanding of modern Logistics.  They might have been able to land a force in Australia but they lacked the ability of supplying such a force and moving it across several thousand kilometres of arid bush to the population centres.  The Japanese understood this. 

In 1942 they held a rare joint planning conference about where they were going next.  The Imperial Japanese Navy, gripped with "Victory Disease" wanted to stage an invasion of Australia.  The Imperial Japanese Army asked difficult questions about ships, did the Navy have sufficient to supply them with their needs?  Were their sufficient to protect their invasion force?  Did the Navy have more land transport to help them get across Australia?  The conversation became so heated that subordinates traded blows.  Basically the conference went no where and by the time it ended Midway had happened and the Japanese were no longer a viable threat. 

As it was, they regularly lied to themselves about what was required to achieve their objectives.  They lied about what forces were required, how many porters they needed and what was available in PNG.  They starved because there was way too few.  So more than likely they would have lied about an invasion of Australia.

Australia is a vast continent.  It had a relatively small population.  A population that was frightened about the possibility of a foreign invasion, usually of an Asian power.  They feared first a Chinese invasion and then later a Japanese one, then a Communist inspired one.  The DLP rode on the coattails of the fears invoked by the "Domino Theory" with images of red fingers reach from China down through Malaysia and Indonesia to Australia.  Like the Japanese it was a myth, engendered by fears of the "Yellow Peril" which we see nowadays in Pauline Hanson's utterances.  China, like Japan has no plans for Australia.  Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Bias_2012 wrote on Dec 10^th, 2023 at 2:11pm:

Easy to revise history once the outcomes are all laid out for you - any fool can do that.

Australians didn't need Eastern Europeans to warn them of the perceived danger from Southeast Asia in the '60s.

Violent anti-colonial sentiment was everywhere in Asia, with Australia seen as their ally - which it was.

Bias_2012 wrote on Dec 10^th, 2023 at 3:39pm:


You were unusual in that you were a young Australian who was aware of what was happening half a world away, Bias.  You also blamed a whole nation for the crimes of a tiny minority or a single person.  I wonder why you hated America so much? 

As for Australia still using WW2 Doctrine, well it worked in WW2 so why not?  We were fighting against a dispersed enemy, the NLF and PAVN, not the Japanese but it was happening in a similar environment.  We were successful against the Japanese and we were successful against the NLF and PAVN, so much so that they were driven back underground, quite often literally.  I trained to fight the NLF/PAVN, I often had to be part of mock-attacks against Vietnamese "villages" on Australian ranges, I had to conduct clearing operations against Vietnamese NLF/PAVN concentrations and defended locales, I had to conduct slow and long patrols.  It was bloody tiring but it worked.  When we left South Vietnam we controlled Phuoc Tuy province, not the NLF/PAVN. 

Yes, we were there for the wrong reasons but when we were there, we were effective.  We protected the South Vietnamese population from NLF/PAVN depredations.  We did not burn those kids, we didn't burn those villages, we didn't kill their president. Tsk, tsk, tsk... 

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 9^th, 2023 at 12:44pm:

Not so on both counts.

No CO would—or in fact could—volunteer(!) any soldiers in his
immediate command (not a "subunit", rather a detachment). 
Deployments were decided at much higher levels than at unit
CO levels.

And no soldier in an active unit would've been deployed overseas
without their advanced, prior knowledge.    That's just nonsense.

AusGeoff wrote on Dec 11^th, 2023 at 4:28am:

Fair enough.

In the context of the song's sentiment, though, some Australians were serving in Vietnam at 19.

mothra wrote on Dec 11^th, 2023 at 8:40am: