The Vietnam Story

[Industrial Toys]

I saw a lot of Vietnam Docs and don't recall ever hearing that. What about Cambodia and Pol Pot? Funny how few people even know that name.

 

[dmccarty]

Did he tell you the north was ready to surrender twice! Did he mention 20 million people died after we left?

Never heard that the North was ready to surrender. Why would they? There were no US or ARVN units in North Vietnam. Nixon did play his I Am Madman Card with the bombing campaign that brought Hanoi into talks which simply led the US abandoning the South. Yes millions died in Vietnam after we left and what Pol Pot killed 30%/2 million of the Cambodian population.

The problem with events like Vietnam, one can't say what would have happened if the US did not become involved. Did the US intervention prevent SE Asian from turning into a massive Cambodia? Did it stop Maoism from marking to and into India? My two cents is that it did.

Pol Pot was just doing what Mao had done in China, and it seems reasonable that if Maoism had spread across SE Asia, that millions more would have died.

For the record, the professor I had was knew his subjects VERY well and was NOT an ideologue. He was doing some really interesting research. Now I did have an ideologue professor who got his PHd in Moscow and I am not talking Moscow, ID.

Later,
Dan

 

[dmccarty]

I saw a lot of Vietnam Docs and don't recall ever hearing that. What about Cambodia and Pol Pot? Funny how few people even know that name.

If you are talking about JFK getting out of Vietnam, here is the book, Amazon.com: JFK and Vietnam: Deception, Intrigue, and the Struggle for Power eBook: John Newman: Kindle Store.

WOW, can't believe I read that book 25 years ago! :shocked: Looks like he has a new edition that might be interesting to read.

Later,
Dan

 

[houstonscott]

Never heard that the North was ready to surrender. Why would they? There were no US or ARVN units in North Vietnam. Nixon did play his I Am Madman Card with the bombing campaign that brought Hanoi into talks which simply led the US abandoning the South. Yes millions died in Vietnam after we left and what Pol Pot killed 30%/2 million of the Cambodian population. The problem with events like Vietnam, one can't say what would have happened if the US did not become involved. Did the US intervention prevent SE Asian from turning into a massive Cambodia? Did it stop Maoism from marking to and into India? My two cents is that it did. Pol Pot was just doing what Mao had done in China, and it seems reasonable that if Maoism had spread across SE Asia, that millions more would have died. For the record, the professor I had was knew his subjects VERY well and was NOT an ideologue. He was doing some really interesting research. Now I did have an ideologue professor who got his PHd in Moscow and I am not talking Moscow, ID. Later, Dan

Something all of you should think about is what General Vo Nguyen Giap, the Commander in Chief of the North Vietnamese Army had to say about John Kerry in his 1985 memoir “How We Won The War”. He said that the North Vietnamese were planning a negotiated surrender after the 68 TET offensive. They watched the US news and heard how distorted our press reported it and the war protesters rioting in the streets of America. He said “We were delighted. We went from a planned surrender to a policy of needing to persevere for one more hour, day, week month, eventually the protesters in America would help us to achieve a victory we knew we could not win on the battlefield.” He also said “If it were not for organizations like John Kerry’s Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the US.”

“What we still don’t understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it. But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. We were ready to surrender. You had won!”

Twice they were waiting to surrender, their generals words not mine.

 

[airbiscuit]

As long as politicians can send the sons and daughters of others into battle, there will be senseless wars...

 

[houstonscott]

Tried to watch. Same media, old liberal crap. Changed channel.

 

[Uncle Lar]

Wouldn't watch it on a bet. The story never changes. Dad was kia, wwII, kid bro was within inches of being killed (combat medic, PH). As many of us say, we was winning when I left (67). I never regretted going.

 

[check]

Something all of you should think about is what General Vo Nguyen Giap, the Commander in Chief of the North Vietnamese Army had to say about John Kerry in his 1985 memoir “How We Won The War”. He said that the North Vietnamese were planning a negotiated surrender after the 68 TET offensive. They watched the US news and heard how distorted our press reported it and the war protesters rioting in the streets of America. He said “We were delighted. We went from a planned surrender to a policy of needing to persevere for one more hour, day, week month, eventually the protesters in America would help us to achieve a victory we knew we could not win on the battlefield.” He also said “If it were not for organizations like John Kerry’s Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the US.” “What we still don’t understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. You had us on the ropes. If you had pressed us a little harder, just for another day or two, we were ready to surrender! It was the same at the battles of TET. You defeated us! We knew it, and we thought you knew it. But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields. We were ready to surrender. You had won!” Twice they were waiting to surrender, their generals words not mine.

Wow. Did not know that.

 

[houstonscott]

Wow. Did not know that.

Look how media covered TET. The north got crushed in TET, total military failure for them, they were set to surrender, but here comes Walter Cronkite, telling Americans it was a disaster for us.... Nixon crushes north and they expect to surrender in Paris, but no we just ask for our prisoners and depart. Vietnam was a failure of liberal media.

 

[CobyRupert]

Every story has more than one version.

I'm over 40, and can't for the life of me understand how a single life was worth it.

Just another winfall for the Military Industrial Complex. Never mind the terrible human toll.

There's your answer.
They say that in war there are no winners, but one can even look today at the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and see there's still have been winners.

Corruption, brutality, incompetence, and nepotism will turn the people against their government no matter what "-ism" (communism, socialism, capitalism, etc.. they claim to be.)
It was almost incomprehensible to Americans, who had been told we must fight for our glorious "-ism", and defeat that other evil "-ism", got into a conflict that wasn't so black and white, where a military solution wasn't the answer like the "good war" of their fathers.

Corruption, brutality, incompetence, nepotism will turn the people against their government no matter what "-ism" they claim to be.

Meanwhile, back at home, the politicians can only see it in the context of some global battle, versus the Soviets. or China and their "-ism", and no one wants to back down, especially after American lives had already been expended, so 57,000 more Americans had to die.
.
Ho Chi Minh knew, as some politicians know today, it's easy to rally the base when you point your hatred toward the foreigners.
Ho also knew, as other politicians know today, it's easy to discredit an existing administration when they have ties to a foreign adversary.