[soyiuz]

This is not a good analogy for the same reason the Holocaust is not a good analogy for other things not involving the massive loss of human life.

[alanwreath]

While I understand the reasoning, at the same time words born out of questionable roots permeate probably any language. Are we to remove all use of words regardless of the useful connotations that their use provides a language because of a dirty past? Words in general are cultural icons and carry with them a lot of history ugly and pleasing alike, but ultimately descriptive. I know that the desire to remove such "ugly" words is becoming the norm (GitHub moving the default branch from master -> main comes to mind) but may I posit the opinion that words, as dirty as their past may be, are only meant to convey an idea (which their corresponding history may have created) and not necessarily support the idea or its originating past in our human (or otherwise) experience. If they convey the intention effectively, however ugly when present in the human experience, why is their use totally off limits? Should we also stop using terms like the Maginot line when describing ineffective preparation? I'm sure the people who were affected by it would assign strong feelings to its failure to protect and result in loss of life. Or how about Icarian -- this word stems from the story of fatal ambitions. Or how about "hysteria" and it's stereo-typification of women. In short the history or etymology of a word over time is less and less connected to the past (unless it's a problem still alive and kicking in our present). I guess, maybe instead of only criticizing the use of words a substitute could be devised/suggested?

It seems like the core of the document (and its title) revolves around a long and drawn out endeavor that is ultimately going to fail to reach it's intended goals - ORM's to a T. Using Vietnam as a descriptive term may not be friendly to international or even younger readers, hence, the extended explanation, but it is effective. May be there was a portion of the article you felt was inappropriate. Sorry, if I'm lost on some obvious detail.

[emilgouliev]

Also, Vietnam is a country… since when does Vietnam refer to the Vietnam War instead of Vietnam?

[killingtime74]

It’s in the first sentence