Quote Originally Posted by Maltese_Love
I apologize in advance if this subject is in the wrong section. I wasn't sure of where to put it, but since it may be a bit controversial I chose here.

Anyway, yesterday I went on a class trip to the Vietnam War Era memorial in Homdel, NJ. It was a really nice place, but one thing got me a bit steamed, and rather confused. They had just added a new War dog memorial into the place, and the tour guide said that about 7,000 dogs went to Vietnam during the war. He said that they couldn't be brought back to the US because of disease/illness. Now, I understand this completely. Then he goes on to say "most of these dogs were eaten..." and that's something I don't get. These dogs are heros, why didn't the US ensure that they weren't eaten? It just doesn't seem fair at all, that they serve their country and see a horrible fate.

I also wanted to know, do they still leave dogs in the countries of war today? I really don't understand the whole process, and thought someone could explain to me.
I don't know about being eaten....that's a new one on me.
We had a dog called Caesar....and he was great, warned us of a few potential danger spots, so got us out of a lot of hot water, ambushes etc.
He could smell the Vietcong out hundreds of yards away. He was also credited with two confirmed kills....confirmed that is !!!!! When he was put down (because he couldn't return to Australia....diseases etc)...he was given a very decent burial, complete with battle honours.....that's how we treated our dogs....not sure what the US guys used to do tho.
Wombat