Journey Back to Vietnam History, the American War

REMEMBERING 04-30-1975
The Pinky show present "Journey Back to Vietnam History"
Bunny and Pinky discuss the origins of the American War (also known as the 'Vietnam War' in America) from the library of Congress, DC.
Wikipedia (Vietnam War) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

How did the U.S. get involved in Vietnam? Why did the U.S. have to fight that War?

Real reason vs. the reason the U.S. Government wanted American public to believe and Misrepresentation.

Let start this journey with a statement made by President John F Kennedy in 1962. How was the relationship between Vietnam and the U.S.?
Wikipedia (JFK) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy

"As you know, the US for more than a decade has been assisting the government, the people of Vietnam, to maintain their independence"(JFK-1962)

How could anybody have any problem with that?
But actually there is a HUGE Problem with his statement.

The first half of that sentence is Misleading "As you know, the US for more than a decade has been assisting the government, the people of Vietnam"

And the second half is simply Untrue "to maintain their Independence"

For example, when President JFK referred to the Government, the people of Vietnam; he failed to mention which Government? It is obviously very important because during the Vietnam War era, there was more than one government struggling for control. And the one had the strongest supports among Vietnamese people was NOT the one that the U.S. was supporting.

Also when President Kennedy said, "assisting the people of Vietnam, to maintain their Independence". It sounded like Vietnamese people were hopeless in the faces of some foreign aggressors, which the U.S. was helping them to repel. In reality the foreign aggressor was the U.S.

Independence (In de- pen den): the quality, the state of self-governing, not subject to control by others.
Wikipedia (Independence) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence

Even the word "Independence was used" is problematic. By definition, independence implies self-determination, sovereignty. But the U.S. had only started bankrolling the French War against Vietnamese people in an attempt to keep Vietnam under French colonial rules.

The statement like this only makes sense if it accepts rather ridiculous idea that Vietnamese needed the US's help in order to maintain their independence from themselves --- > Independence = the quality, the state of being controlled by others?

So where do we learn the things that we know about the Vietnam War / the American War.

Most people think they know a little bit about the Vietnam War. Things we have seen in the movies, TVs, information we received from the Government, from newspapers, high school textbooks and so on. The problem is that most of the stuff is factually incorrect or misleading. The interpretation of facts is one thing but you can't start understanding built on outright misinformation. It just doesn't work.

Next: Who was involved? Their interests, who won and why?

DESIRE & STRUGGLE, A BASIC TIMELINE OF EVENTS

What American think of Vietnam before 1960? It's a far away, nightmare, jungle type of place. Vietnam exists for thousands of years with its own cultures and its own identity. Even in the ancient time, we had struggled against foreign domination.

+ China occupied Vietnam for about 1,000 years. Vietnamese finally expelled the Chinese in the 10-11th century.

+ But again in the mid 1,800, Vietnam again fell under foreign domination. During this time, France colonized it. The French ruled Vietnam through a puppet government.(Emperor Bao Dai was a puppet Ruler) but Vietnamese people suffered no less than previous Ruler. French controlled Vietnam almost 100 years until 1940 Japan began its own occupation of Vietnam militarily.
Wikipedia (Bao Dai) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bao_Dai

+ The Japanese kept both the French and the puppet governments in place while exercising control behind the scenes. Imagine how Vietnamese people had suffered during those years under essentially "double puppet governments."
Wikipedia (puppet government) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppet_state

+ In1941 and continuing through out the WWII years, Viet Minh was formed. They were a group of Vietnamese Nationalists who dreamed of an Independent Vietnam, free from foreign domination. The first political objective was to oust the Japanese and the French from Vietnam homeland. Leader Communist Revolutioner Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969) was supported by the U.S. and China because he was fighting against the mutual enemy, the Japanese from within Vietnam.

The Viet Minh was fighting the Japanese.
The Viet Minh vs. the Japanese -- > the U.S. supported Viet Minh.
Wikipedia (Viet Minh) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Minh
Wikipedia (Ho Chi Minh) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ho_Chi_Minh

Some of you probably have a question, "the U.S. supported Ho Chi Minh?" Are you kidding? No. I'm not because the Viet Minh were fighting against the Japanese. Interesting huh?
WWII was lying down. It became clear to everyone that Japan was going to lose the War and many Vietnamese believe that maybe Independence was close at hand.

Well it obviously did not happen.

+ Far away, in a Summit meeting held at Yalta in 1945, leaders from the U.S.(Roosevelt), USSR (Stalin) and Great Britain (Churchill) decided how they were going to divide the World after the WWII was over. Needless to say, Vietnamese or anybody else were not really matter, they were not invited to the Summit.
Wikipedia (Yalta Conference) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yalta_Conference

+ The planet was divided into "Spheres of Influence: Post WWII". For instant, the US and UK would have influence over Western Europe and the Soviet Union would have Eastern Europe. The US have controlled over North and South America. The UK and US would share control over the Middle East and so on.

+ Ok, what's about Vietnam?

Roosevelt was not a big fan of European empires, he knew that Vietnamese had suffered tremendously under the French Rule, but he was also very sensitive to his WWII allies, the English and the French. He was a close friend of Churchill. The Great Britain PM felt that if Vietnam gained its own independence, it would set a very bad example to their Colonies under British empire, especially India.

So in the end, the three parties (Roosevelt, Churchill and de Gaulle) decided let the French keep Vietnam. Many would say WOW. Not me.

+ Back in Vietnam, WWII was over and the Japanese surrendered to Viet Minh. Japanese soldiers were charged as war criminals in 1945. Viet Minh declared Vietnam's Independence. And basically there were a lot of parties in the streets. But you got the feeling that it did not last long. You are right.

+ With Japanese was no longer a threat, the US revoked it backing of Viet Minh and Vietnamese Independence and instead transferred its support to the French and they immediately established Vietnam as its colony. Obviously to Viet Minh, basically they were betrayed and of course they resisted.

The Viet Minh was fighting the French
The Viet Minh vs. the French -- > the U.S. supported the French.

+ Full scale War between Vietnamese and French broke up in 1946. Although the War was referred to French-Indo China War, behind the scene, the U.S. was France's "silence partner" and financed up to 80% of France's war costs. But even with all the money and guns on their side, Viet Minh decisively defeated the French in 1954 after 9 years of very bloody fighting.
Wikipedia (the Indochina War) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Indochina_...

+ For the second time within 10 years, look like; Vietnamese were on the verse of total Independence right? Guess what, the answer is No. You are right again. No Independence yet.

+ You would think that getting defeat from the battle field means that the losers would pick up all of their stuff and leave immediately. But in real world the situation was not that simple. Remember the French was in Vietnam about 100 years, the War and French colonization itself had left Vietnam under disorganized mess and also the formal terms of French surrender had to be discussed between all parties: Vietnam, France along with China, Great Britain, the U.S. and Soviet Union, they all met in Geneva (in 1954) to sort everything out. And this is where it got very interesting but it was also tricky. So pay attention ok.

AT THE GENEVA CONFERENCE 1954,

the first thing needed to be discussed was how actually ending the fighting.

- Negotiate cease-fire
- Separate the combatants

Wikipedia (Geneva Conference 1954) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conferenc... (1954)

It decided that Vietnam was temporarily divided in half into "regroupment areas". The Viet Minh force collected up North of the 17th parallel and the French was in the South. After getting other stuff all together, the French will then leave and then after a period of "Two Years"," Unified National Elections" would be held in both the North and the South in 1956 at which time, Vietnamese people would be formally and finally independent from foreign domination, under single government of their choice. "It was the Plan."

The two sides agreed those terms for different reasons.

- Leader Ho Chi Minh felt that even though the Viet Minh could have eventually swept out the remaining French forces, he also knew that there would be many more people died unnecessary and Viet Minh had strong support among Vietnamese people. He was sure that Viet Minh will easily win the National Election.***

- The French and the American on the other hand also wanted to end the fighting. The French was obviously incapable of conducting a military victory. And the two years window before the election is good under the eyes of the American because they also knew that if the elections were taking place right away, Viet Minh would win it easily. The US was obviously did not want a communist government in Vietnam, a government that certainly be more politically and economically allied with China and Soviet Union rather than the U.S. So the U.S. saw the two years as window of opportunities during which they have a chance to pour money and materials into the southern half of Vietnam and created a sense of a good economy. They hoped that it would gain enough support among Vietnamese people to elect a government that would be more open to the U.S.'s influence. That was exactly what the U.S. did.

- As French left Vietnam, the U.S. seized the moment and immediately embarked upon enormous efforts and started Nation building. The US took control over Southern part of Vietnam and the result was a new Nation was created "South Vietnam" aka "Republic of Vietnam".
This is the most commonly misunderstood aspect of the Vietnam War (the American War in Vietnam).

Wikipedia (South Vietnam) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Vietnam

TRUE OR FALSE?

FACTS ABOUT THE VIETNAM WAR

+ North Vietnam's government (the Viet Minh) was communists.(TRUE)

+ South Vietnam's government was democratic?(FALSE)

+ The U.S. was helping the people of South Vietnam repel "communist aggression" or something like that.(MOSTLY FALSE)(Will explain later)

+ Most people don't realize that South Vietnam was essentially invented by the U.S.(TRUE) as a base to build and maintain its own interests in Asia. And actually nothing in the Geneva Accords explicitly stated that Vietnam would have to split into two separated countries.

+ Geneva Accords decided that Vietnam be split into two countries.(FALSE)(HONEST! Go read it!) I did not know that before I read it. Most people just say North Vietnam, South Vietnam and always like that. They did not realize that the U.S. exploited a particular situation and that part of the Nation was invented to create a foothold for their interests in the region. Vietnamese people by enlarge did not want their country split in half.

So what happened next?

The US, created puppet government, as you all know "Ngo Dinh Diem government".

Wikipedia (Ngo Dinh Diem) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngo_Dinh_Diem

Ref ***
"MR. O'REILLY: Our military analysts, I think, are the best in the business I hear at FOX and they think that this is now Vietnam in the sense that it's a war of attrition. That the al-Qaida and the Sunni fanatics have said, "We're going to wear the United States of American down. OK, we're going to bomb them down." Just like Ho Chi Minh did in Vietnam. And sooner or later, probably sooner, the American public's going to turn on the action and demand they pullout. The American public is now against the war, according to the polls. Is the war of attrition being won by the terrorists and the Sunnis?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, I don't see this as a war of attrition, and I think the Vietnam analogy is really faulty. You don't have, for instance, a big conventional army on the other side of the line as you did with the North Vietnamese army, with lots of outside help from China and Russia, the Soviet Union and others. And you certainly don't have a "resistance movement" that could be thought of as at least as popular. This is not a popular movement by any stretch of the imagination. And that's why it will not take hold in Iraq and it will eventually die.
"

URL: http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/53155....
End Ref ***

+ The United States installed a new puppet government to control southern part of Vietnam, this regime was newly created, the so-called "South Vietnam". They chose a devoted anti-communist catholic Ngo Dinh Diem. He was South Vietnamese President during 1955-1963 and later exiled in New Jersey. That was how we had a new government in Saigon.

+ Two years window went by quickly and as agree upon the National Election approached, it became clear that Diem and his American backers were still not popular enough to win an election against a more popular Leader Ho Chi Minh. There were frequent anti-American demonstrations in the streets of South Vietnam. One of the popular protesting arose at the time was among Vietnamese Buddhists Coalition.

+ The US encouraged Diem to block the 1956 Election, which he did. The election never took place. Diem regime was characterized by Corruption, oppression and by around 1960 grassroots opposition with support by the Viet Minh leadership from the North began to fill up southern countryside. They are National Liberation Front of South Vietnam a.k.a. NLF. Diem and American called them Vietcong.
“Throughout this period the level of U.S. aid and political support increased. South Vietnam refused to hold national elections in 1956 to reunify Vietnam as specified by the Geneva Accords between France and North Vietnam. Diem pointed out that his delegation did not sign the Geneva accords and was therefore not bound by it. He claimed the communist government in the North created conditions that made a fair election impossible in that region.”

Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Vietnam

Many American believed Vietcong were from North Vietnam.

Wait. That was also the most misunderstanding about the Vietnam War.

TRUE or FALSE?

+ The US military fought the Vietcong in North Vietnam?(FALSE.)

+ Most of the fighting took place in South Vietnam.(TRUE)

+ A lot of people knew that American fought against an enemy called Vietcong and they just assumed that the Vietcong were from North Vietnam. Well, especially from the early stage of the Vietnam War, most of the Vietcong were from the Southern part of Vietnam. They received guns, supplies and other kind of supports from the Viet Minh in the Northern part through Ho Chi Minh Trail, but the Vietcong actually rooted in the Vietnamese penetrated areas in South Vietnam. This very much contradicted what most people thought of the situation. American and its allied regime were in the South and Vietcong were in the North and of course the battle front area was somewhere in the middle at parallel 17th. This is NOT ACCURATE.

My Note:” This is NOT how it happened".

+ The Vietcong basically was social and political revolutionary movement, dedicated to ousting the American and its puppet government by forces. So of course the US considered them as an enemy and that's why all of the fighting during the Vietnam War took place within border of Southern part of Vietnam.

+ That is pretty ironic. You have the President of the United States telling American people that they were in Vietnam to help the Vietnamese to maintain their Independence and at the same time they were in Vietnam to fight Vietnamese as their enemy. I think it is important to point this kind of thing out because understanding the geography of the war also reveal certain realities that some how managed to escape American consciousness. The Vietcong was trying to oust foreign occupier (the US military) out of their country.

+ By 1963 the Vietcong had gained widespread popular support throughout South Vietnam. The US was getting really annoyed by Diem's inability to control the situation. The U.S. orchestrated Diem's assassination in November of that year. Immediately after that the U.S. started exercising much more direct control over Southern part of Vietnam.

+ Back in America, President John F. Kennedy was himself assassinated and Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson assumed the presidency.
Wikipedia (LBJ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnso...

+ The following year 1964 represented the crucial turning point. Privately, the Johnson administration decided that "All-Out-War" was the only way to defeat Vietnamese but American public opinion remained struggling divided.

+ So what was the Solution? The Johnson administration orchestrated kind of war time event and now known as an infamous 1964 "The Tonkin Affair" that was giving Johnson a virtual "blank check" to use U.S. military force in Vietnam. Dirty Politics, isn't it? It happened anyhow.

White House Tapes: http://tapes.millercenter.virginia.edu/exhibi...

Wikipedia (Tonkin Affair) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonkin_Affair

American public were pissed off and In August 1964, Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, US war planes began bombing Vietnam almost immediately and it lasted almost a decade. By 1969 there were more than half of million of US combat troops in Vietnam fighting while American people can barely find Vietnam on the World map. The US was fighting an enemy that no one seemed to understand.

Does this remind you a whole thing about WMD in Iraq?

It does seem to repeat itself to me.

SEARCHING FOR REASONS

So far I have described how the United States had become involved in Vietnam but I have not explained "WHY?" Do you know why did the U.S. think Vietnam was worth killing and dying for?

This is the most frequent explanation to American public: To stop the Communist expansion in Asia because Leader Ho Chi Minh was a Communist. The U.S. assumed that Viet Minh were a puppet of China, maybe Soviet or maybe a little bit of both. The feeling at the time was that if the U.S. let Viet Minh took control over Vietnam, then it would initiate the kind of change and reaction in nearby areas like Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia, etc… They would all fall like "The DOMINO Theory", and they would eventually become under Communist's influences. The U.S. government believed that an obvious solution to take control over the situation was that to make sure the so-called First Domino, Vietnam did not fall. This is the main reason WHY the U.S.'s government poured so much money and effort to create and invent a "South Vietnam".
Wikipedia (the Domino Theory) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory

One would ask why was communism perceived to be a threat to the U.S. of America? Everybody was saying we got to stop Communism, Communism is really evil and stuff like that but why is that the U.S. was so against Communism? The US saw Communism some kind of "enemy" and actually also any form of socialism would be in that category too. But the thing is whenever people talk about how bad communism is, they often talk about evil doers in term of "authoritarian and oppressive" while the U.S. all about "freedom and democracy" which point to an "obvious question",

+ If the US foreign policy since World War II had been only about making moral choices between democracy and authoritarianism, wouldn't the U.S. have a long history of supporting democratic movements on principle? And

[[[[The Answer is IT does NOT]]]]

Let take a look at history to review this matter regarding to U.S. foreign policy decision in the 20th century. The U.S. actually has "a poor record"*** when it comes to supporting democratic movements around the Globe. The US had been just as willing to support and overthrow the newly democratic elected government Pinochet (Chile) or hailing a dictatorship Suharto (Indonesia), Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Grenada, Congo, Philippines, Greece and so on. These are just few examples. So here is the point:

Wikipedia (Pinochet) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet

+ The Single Most Important Measure of the country receiving support from the U.S. had been whether or Not that country's MARKETS, LABOR or RESOURCES could be made available to American business.

+ Question: What was the heart of the U.S. foreign policy?

+ Answer: The desire to control foreign markets, labor and resources

+ Sometimes it required supporting powerful landlords against tenants, in other case it was a dictator who could produce the most desirable result. In the case of Vietnam, the situation required supporting business owners in the city, as well as powerful landlord and then waging the kind of class war (burning homes and rice) against landless groups. The important thing to remember is that the specifics had all been secondary to the Primary Objective of security and stable environment in which American Style Capitalism can thrive. This is the way in which the U.S. foreign policy actually had been very consistent. So this is more a real reason to me why spreading of socialism was a threat to the American Ruling Class.

***This is how Historian Jonathan Neale had summarized it:

"These State Socialist Countries were threats not so much because they called themselves "Socialists", but because they were competing Capitalist Powers and their markets were largely closed to American business".

I don't know about you, but this is pretty clear to me. Most American think about Vietnam War, it was about a civil war? However the fundamental fighting was between the people of Vietnam and the U.S. Vietnamese do not call it a Civil War, it was the American War. Vietnamese saw American forces as foreign occupiers and we were fighting to expel them out of their country. In other words, from Vietnamese perspective, it was a War for Independence.

Some would ask, if there was not a Civil War, and it was a war for Independence, why there were such many Vietnamese who were on the side of the newly invented South Vietnam or Vietnamese who served in the South Vietnam's army? Who were those people?

VIETNAMESE IDENTITY

Well. Remember how Vietnam had been a French colony for really long time, 100 years or so. One of the things the colonizer will often do to rule over a country is to create a minority ruling class within the native population; give them lots of privileges and powers and have them do lots of dirty works. So the French used these Vietnamese, the money business class in the city, land owners, Vietnamese Catholics and so on, to rule over the rest of the population, mostly Buddhists, mostly rural, landless and most of all very poor.

When the French was finally forced out of Vietnam, many of these Vietnamese who were benefits from the French rules turned to the American. To the majority of Vietnamese people though, these people were collaborators, traitors. The American exploited this complicated situation in Vietnam, basically a class war and a land war and a struggle for Independence. The US government painted it as a Civil War to the American public at home in order to get public support and use military intervention in Vietnam. In fact the War was fought to seek business opportunity for the American elite. So the American at home thought the war was fought between two sides, the good side and the evil side. And of course they thought the U.S. was supporting the good guy. The American public was totally ignorant of Vietnamese history or even its own Imperialism at least for a while.

Wikipedia (American Empire) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Empire

There is the thing so-called American National Archive, a big library with all historical documents a.k.a. the Library of Congress. The United States – Vietnam relations 1945-1967: a Study prepared by the Department of Defense (the Pentagon Papers), US State department own official history of the Vietnam War of 4,000 pages that had been de-classified. Everybody can read. If you look at this stuff, it's quite clear that at the highest level, American leaders had no illusion that they were fighting the War for the benefits of Vietnamese people. So the most parts, they would have cared less about it. But the same time, it also very clear that none of the U.S Presidents, Secretaries of States, Generals, all of those guys who were in controls took the Vietnamese perspective seriously. They were so certain that the Cold War model, Domino theory, they all explained everything quite nicely. They were reluctant to their own way of looking at the situation. It's really important. They did not understand what motivated the Vietcong and North Vietnamese army more than any single thing. I think this made American defeat inevitable.

For our part, the patriotic Vietnamese people thought the United States absolutely did not see our struggle as self-defense; we were fighting the War along with some greater communist clubs. They were not puppets of the Soviet, Chinese or anybody else. In fact many people who fought for the VCs and allies were not even communists. They were fighting for the idea of an Independent Vietnam. And we understood our struggle to expel the American army, the thing that directly connected to 2,000 years history of resistant foreign domination. In fact, this knowledge, this feeling was the core element of Vietnamese Identity.

Have the American leaderships had been willing to emphasize on their enemy; Perhalf they would have known that we, Vietnamese people were ready to fight till the last man, we would had never surrendered.

In high sight, did American confuse between Cold War and War for Independence? Well it almost seemed obvious and embarrassing for the American. Did American not try to learn anything about Vietnamese history before taking on this War? Or American leaderships disregarded all reliable information in this matter to the extent imposing their paradigm on the situation regardless whether or not it fits or it was just arrogant? Which one was it? I don't know. Maybe it was all of the above.

You know, I thought about it quite a bit, I'm kind of have an idea that maybe there was something to do with the American, with its own colonial past, maybe a nation of its own history of genocide (Ref: Wounded Knee, South Dakota) and taking land by forces and erase from memory. Maybe it helps to render Vietnamese people struggle for land, sovereignty. I can't think of any other way to explain why they couldn't see what happened right there in front of them.

Wikipedia (Wounded Knee) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Mas...

Lesson from a Total Defeat for the US
The End of the Vietnam War, 30 Years Ago
By GABRIEL KOLKO

South Vietnam was an artificially urbanized society whose only economic basis was American aid. The value of that aid declined when the oil price increases that began with the war in the Middle East in 1973 caused a rampant inflation, at which point the motorized army and society the Americans had created became an onerous liability.

The Saigon army commanded by Nguyen van Thieu also was far stronger than their adversaries. At the beginning of 1975 they had over three times as much artillery, twice as many tanks and armored cars, 1400 aircraft and a virtual monopoly of the air. They had a two-to-one superiority of combat troops-roughly 700,000 to 320,000. The Communist leadership in early 1975 expected the war to last as much as a decade longer. I was in South Vietnam at the end of 1973 and in Hanoi all of April 1975 until the last four days of the war, when I was in Hue and Danang in the south. I am certain the Communists were almost as surprised as the Americans that victory was to be theirs so quickly and easily; I told them from late 1973 onward to expect an end to the war by the Saigon regime capsizing without a serious fight-much as the Kuomintang had in China after 1947. As a future Politburo member later confessed, they regarded my prediction as "crazy." They were completely unprepared to run the entire nation, and their chaotic, inconsistent economic policies since 1975 have shown it.

http://www.counterpunch.org/kolko04292005.htm...

CONSEQUENCES

Did you go to Vietnam War Memorial? It is a powerful place to the American. There is a big wall with more than 50,000 names on it, names of US personnel who died in the Vietnam War. In addition, about 150,000 more people who suffered serious physical injuries and no one can ever know how many more have suffered emotionally, psychologically. John McCain is one of them. He should know it better than anybody else.

Do you know how many Vietnamese people died in the Vietnam? Well. I did try to find this out. There is no official number. The truth is in Vietnam the devastation of the War ran so deep and so widespread that no one really knows the exact number of people killed or serious injured during the War years. Most estimates ran somewhere between [3-3.5] millions Vietnamese people were killed. And no one also know how many of those people were civilians. For political reasons, the US military often added any dead bodies men, women, children, civilian or not, as the death of VCs or VNCH soldiers for the "body count". Until this day, there are still about 300,000 considered to be missing in action. So the numbers are hard to decide for certainty.

You know the War destroyed Vietnam in many other ways as well. First there were "Bombs". Vietnam has been concentrated and intensely bombing history has never seen before. The US military raided 8,000,000 tons; Yes 8 Million tons of bombs down on Vietnam. It was almost "THREE TIMES" the total amount of all the bombs dropped worldwide during the World War Two, All on a country that is quite a bit smaller than the size of California. Their targets were everything, schools, hospitals, temples; they dropped bombs on everything. The US also used a lot of biological warfare in Vietnam. The purpose was to destroy the environment, essentially made it hard for the VCs to hide in the forest and to destroy crops and livestock so that Vietnamese people may surrender due to starvation or other kind of suffering. More than 6 million acres of South Vietnam were sprayed AO including villages and farms which killed thousands of civilians and contaminated lands so severely some part of our nation recently (over 30 years later) just started to grow again. A wide range of birth defects caused by teratogen-(noun from Greek) literally meaning "monster making"; an agent that cause birth defects.

Wikipedia (Agent Orange) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange

Another thing is that millions of Vietnamese became refugees. Nobody even knows how many thousands of people died during this period of time. And also an estimate of 6 millions of unexploded mines and bombs remained continued to kill farmers and children even today. The lingering effect of the War in our country is simply too much to put into words. It is just going on and on. This war was totally out of control. I'm sure everyone would agree that every war, every conflict costs tremendous suffering on almost everybody involved but I think it is also true that all wars are not the same. In another word, each war is unique.

Many military historians have pointed out, even by war standard, the Vietnam War was very cruel and brutal war. From the technological military standpoint, when you have the World's richest and most powerful military, fighting an all-out-war against a relatively small and extremely poor, third world country; you can almost say that the result were predictable. But it doesn't really explain why the U.S. chose to devastated Vietnam to such an extreme; policies that lead to killing millions of people, culture, environment to a very brink of an eye of violent. So everyone should be bothered by this question, who made that decision to absolutely devastate the country of Vietnam? Did the people of U.S. of America really make some kind of decision?

I guess we now can say that the War was played out that way by design. I mean yeah, definitely. OK, Let's me put it another way. Parts of the reason why US War planners consciously utilize only the most ultra violent tactics were directly related to their faulty analysis I was talking about earlier. Because they mischaracterize the VCs and North Vietnamese army, the US plan for victory became relatively simple,

+ KILL as many people as possible

+ INFLICT so much unbearable sufferings so that eventually our will would be broken therefore we would surrender.

That's why only the most brutal war tactics were chosen which of course this also explained why the strategy failed. That strategy also does tell America's own history of racism and class warfare. Let me remind you a major candidate for President of the United Stated of America in 2008 would agree with this analysis. I may not like what I hear but that is how Obama’s people feel And he offers to back it up his claims btw.

Obama's Pastor youtube video clip (Warning! Violent Languages)

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

+ I think had leaders in the US have been able to look at Vietnamese people as fully human. Maybe at that particular moment in history had been unfolded differently. Why is that in time of conflict during the War, for various reasons, people tending to make conscious effort to strip their enemy of their humanness. I'm convinced this will only lead to more cases and more death.

+ The most important reason of all is that "IT DIDN'T HAVE TO HAPPEN".

Thanks you very much and
See you Bunny!

Ryan Boston wrote:

DESIRE & STRUGGLE, A BASIC TIMELINE OF EVENTS
+ In1941 and continuing through out the WWII years, Viet Minh was formed. They were a group of Vietnamese Nationalists who dreamed of an Independent Vietnam, free from foreign domination. The first political objective was to oust the Japanese and the French from Vietnam homeland. Leader Communist Revolutioner Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969) was supported by the U.S. and China because he was fighting against the mutual enemy, the Japanese from within Vietnam.

The Viet Minh was fighting the Japanese.
The Viet Minh vs. the Japanese -- > the U.S. supported Viet Minh.
Wikipedia (Viet Minh) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Minh
Wikipedia (Ho Chi Minh) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ho_Chi_Minh

Ryan,
You obviously have great interest in history especially the recent history of Vietnam.
Let me offer a counter view on Ho Chi Minh lead Vietminh fighting Japanese invasion in their struggle for the Independence of Vietnam.
First, the young Nguyen Tat Thanh, like many of his generation was looking for a way to save Vietnam from the French. Phan Boi Chau started the Dong du Movement. Phan Chu Trinh advocated the improvement of "dan tri" using the French's colonist rule. Nguyen Thai Hoc formed Viet nam Quoc Dan Dang based on the Chinese's Kuomintang. I accept that the young Thanh might have harboured this thought of saving Vietnam at least while he was surrounded by patriots like Phan Chu Trinh and comrades in France. However, Thanh chose communism and later on became a member of the Comintern and was sent to China and later Vietnam to spread the communism there.

As a member of the Comintern responsible for the East, Ho Chi Minh had to follow instructions to mobilise Vietnamese against the Fascist Japanese who was the enemy of Soviet Union at the time.

Link:http://en.wikipedia.org/w iki/Communist_Party_of_Vietnam

"Soon thereafter, at its first plenum the party changed its name to the Communist Party of Indochina (Đảng cộng sản Đông Dương), on directions from Comintern.[1]

The First National Party Congress was held in secret in Macau in 1935. At the same time, a Comintern congress in Moscow adopted a policy towards a popular front against fascism and directed Communist movements around the world to collaborate with anti-fascist forces regardless of their orientation towards socialism. This required the ICP to regard all nationalist parties in Indochina as potential allies."

Well, until he died in 1969, Ho remained loyal to International communist Movement Comintern even though the conflict between Soviet Union and Red China had results in many fights between them and yet, Ho still hoped for an International communist movement.

The fact that Soviet Union was an ally of the US during the Second World War was the reason why Ho Chi Minh had to assist the US in the border region of Vietnam and China. Ho wasn't interested in being a friend of the US, but simply carried out a normal function of an agent for the Comintern.

That is the history.

Ryan Boston wrote:

DESIRE & STRUGGLE, A BASIC TIMELINE OF EVENTS
+ In1941 and continuing through out the WWII years, Viet Minh was formed. They were a group of Vietnamese Nationalists who dreamed of an Independent Vietnam, free from foreign domination. The first political objective was to oust the Japanese and the French from Vietnam homeland. Leader Communist Revolutioner Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969) was supported by the U.S. and China because he was fighting against the mutual enemy, the Japanese from within Vietnam.

The Viet Minh was fighting the Japanese.
The Viet Minh vs. the Japanese -- > the U.S. supported Viet Minh.
Wikipedia (Viet Minh) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Minh
Wikipedia (Ho Chi Minh) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ho_Chi_Minh

Ryan,

You obviously have great interest in history especially the recent history of Vietnam.

Let me offer a counter view on Ho Chi Minh lead Vietminh fighting Japanese invasion in their struggle for the Independence of Vietnam.

First, the young Nguyen Tat Thanh, like many of his generation was looking for a way to save Vietnam from the French. Phan Boi Chau started the Dong du Movement. Phan Chu Trinh advocated the improvement of "dan tri" using the French's colonist rule. Nguyen Thai Hoc formed Viet nam Quoc Dan Dang based on the Chinese's Kuomintang.

I accept that the young Thanh might have harboured this thought of saving Vietnam at least while he was surrounded by patriots like Phan Chu Trinh and comrades in France. However, Thanh chose communism and later on became a member of the Comintern and was sent to China and later Vietnam to spread the communism there.

As a member of the Comintern responsible for the East, Ho Chi Minh had to follow instructions to mobilise Vietnamese against the Fascist Japanese who was the enemy of Soviet Union at the time.

Link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_...

"Soon thereafter, at its first plenum the party changed its name to the Communist Party of Indochina (Dang Cong san Dong duong), on directions from Comintern.[1]

The First National Party Congress was held in secret in Macau in 1935. At the same time, a Comintern congress in Moscow adopted a policy towards a popular front against fascism and directed Communist movements around the world to collaborate with anti-fascist forces regardless of their orientation towards socialism. This required the ICP to regard all nationalist parties in Indochina as potential allies."

Well, until he died in 1969, Ho remained loyal to International communist Movement Comintern even though the conflict between Soviet Union and Red China had results in many fights between them and yet, Ho still hoped for an International communist movement.

The fact that Soviet Union was an ally of the US during the Second World War was the reason why Ho Chi Minh had to assist the US in the border region of Vietnam and China. Ho wasn't interested in being a friend of the US, but simply carried out a normal function of an agent for the Comintern.

That is the history.

Phiengung wrote:

<quoted text>
Ryan,
You obviously have great interest in history especially the recent history of Vietnam.
Let me offer a counter view on Ho Chi Minh lead Vietminh fighting Japanese invasion in their struggle for the Independence of Vietnam.
First, the young Nguyen Tat Thanh, like many of his generation was looking for a way to save Vietnam from the French. Phan Boi Chau started the Dong du Movement. Phan Chu Trinh advocated the improvement of "dan tri" using the French's colonist rule. Nguyen Thai Hoc formed Viet nam Quoc Dan Dang based on the Chinese's Kuomintang.
I accept that the young Thanh might have harboured this thought of saving Vietnam at least while he was surrounded by patriots like Phan Chu Trinh and comrades in France. However, Thanh chose communism and later on became a member of the Comintern and was sent to China and later Vietnam to spread the communism there.
As a member of the Comintern responsible for the East, Ho Chi Minh had to follow instructions to mobilise Vietnamese against the Fascist Japanese who was the enemy of Soviet Union at the time.
Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_...
"Soon thereafter, at its first plenum the party changed its name to the Communist Party of Indochina (Dang Cong san Dong duong), on directions from Comintern.[1]
The First National Party Congress was held in secret in Macau in 1935. At the same time, a Comintern congress in Moscow adopted a policy towards a popular front against fascism and directed Communist movements around the world to collaborate with anti-fascist forces regardless of their orientation towards socialism. This required the ICP to regard all nationalist parties in Indochina as potential allies."
Well, until he died in 1969, Ho remained loyal to International communist Movement Comintern even though the conflict between Soviet Union and Red China had results in many fights between them and yet, Ho still hoped for an International communist movement.
The fact that Soviet Union was an ally of the US during the Second World War was the reason why Ho Chi Minh had to assist the US in the border region of Vietnam and China. Ho wasn't interested in being a friend of the US, but simply carried out a normal function of an agent for the Comintern.
That is the history.

that is the his story by Phiengung.
very funny.

Stateless wrote:

<quoted text>
that is the his story by Phiengung.
very funny.

Hey, how've you been? It was a gorgeous day in Boston and we are not calling for rain tomorrow, so we expect a great Memorial Day. It was like an unofficial Summer time this weekend. Enjoy it while you can.

I bet you are not a good listener or at least you did not patiently read what he/she wrote. Get tired of those stuff? There wasn't anything different from pinky's pov tho. He/She should have cited the material instead, it may have helped you not to confuse.

In an issue, the Time magazine said: Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist, he was not really a communist. He followed communism because he thought it was the way to save the country from France. He remained a communist because America's involvement in Viet Nam and he needed supports from China and Soviet Union. Sorry, I can not give you a reference but those arguments are quite subjective anyway.

Vietnamese wrote:

In an issue, the Time magazine said: Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist, he was not really a communist. He followed communism because he thought it was the way to save the country from France. He remained a communist because America's involvement in Viet Nam and he needed supports from China and Soviet Union. Sorry, I can not give you a reference but those arguments are quite subjective anyway.

The debates in those days were about how much a communist Ho Chi Minh was and how much a nationalist he was. The French and Americans put forward those questions to justify their occupation of Vietnam. Whether Ho Chi Minh was a communist was not relevant to the Vietnamese in those days because no body knew any thing about communism. They knew one thing. To have freedom they must have first their country back from the French and later from the Americans.
To the Vietnamese it was a war of Independance and not a war between capitalism and communism.