Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The author of that article seems a bit bitter. I have seen countless documentaries about the Vietnam war, and they all agree that although Ho was a commie, he was liked by the North Vietnamese (and the communist South Vietnamese), which is evidenced by the fact that they were willing to die for him. Diem in the South was not liked by anyone, even if he improved the economic situation in the South. The villagers dispised the idea of being forcibly moved to the 'hamlets', and the people in the cities saw him as an elitist. The army was in the fight half-heartedly, and in the end was happy to put a bullet in his head.
Burns is not making it up that Ho was more liked by his own people than Diem was.
Fair enough. points that are uncontestable...........
^^^^^ liberal education at the colleges at taxpayers expense.
Nothing would have happened if we didn't fight the Cold WAR aggressively?
what has Trump given Putin again? you got Trump confused with Obama and Hillary.
I've been interested to read your comments, and I think lots of your perspective, notions and emotions are easy to understand, even for a "lib" like me...
However, it seems your battle with liberals is on par with your battle with communism, and maybe there are some pretty significant issues to consider from all sorts of other angles that no one can fully comprehend from any one vantage point. True or no? Especially from our angle here in America so different from places like east Asia and the Middle East, with our short history compared to just about everywhere else on the planet. Hard not to wonder just how "smart" our leaders have been given all the significant influences that compelled us to action, going back to the McCarthy era when we attacked even our own over the likes of these fears, real or imagined.
Has to make even the tried and true war vet think twice if you ask me...
Call it "arm chair quarterbacking" if you like, but if we don't think critically about when, where and how we have committed our lives to fighting these battles, killing plenty others in the process too, we're not likely to fight future wars any better, and we're certainly not likely to avoid them any better either.
I'm surprised they didn't play Emerson Lake & Palmers "Oh What A Lucky Man He Was" for poor Mougie, he only lasted 8 months and no mention if he got any kills. I was kinda hoping he was going to be a 4 tour guy, and after killing 300 VC soldiers, he finally gets captured and is executed for killing the commander of the POW camp. RIP Mougie, war is hell.
That was a great post a couple pages back about what is missing in this doc and the subtle leftist taint, but it also has a lot of detail and I kinda like how they interview the people on the VC side, like that part about the Ho Chi Trail and the defectors that went back home to North Vietnam and were "educated" and brought back. I wonder what "educated" meant, probably beaten within an inch of their lives and sent back at gunpoint. The interviews of the North VC generals and commanders make this interesting, how they adjusted strategy as it unfolded, and they had their old uniforms on for the interview, with the rows of red stars on the shoulders. F'ing Commies, lol.
It kinda surprised me in part 1, in the way the French administered Vietnam after WW2. France had a pretty fresh memory of what being occupied by a brutal force was like in day to day living, with the Nazi occupation. One would think they would have treated the Vietnamese with much more kindness than they did.
I liked the opening of last nights episode where LBJ is chatting with the new South Vietnam puppet leader and his inner circle, and tells them he does not want fancy speeches, he wants "Coonskins on the Wall" and later they had to ask what he meant by that, after the meeting, lol.
I think you go a little too far in regarding Vietnam as one move in a giant chess match between Democracy and Communism. That's not what motivated the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese. They were nationalists first of all. They had seen their nation dominated by foreign powers, artificially divided in two, with the southern half ruled by another foreign puppet. To the North Vietnamese, the struggle was to liberate and reunify the country. No doubt the Russians used them as pawns, as we used the South, but to the citizens of Vietnam that's not what it was all about.
Good point. I listened to a talk show the other day, when they were discussing this documentary. They mentioned that a country will unite against a foreign power from thousands of miles away, that has come onto its shores, even if it's in the name of "helping" them. The country may be two sides fighting, but the instinct to protect the entire country trumps that. It is often the game changer when wars are fought.
I liked the opening of last nights episode where LBJ is chatting with the new South Vietnam puppet leader and his inner circle, and tells them he does not want fancy speeches, he wants "Coonskins on the Wall" and later they had to ask what he meant by that, after the meeting, lol.
I thought that was funny also. I could make a comment of what I thought LBJ really meant, but I won't.
Commander in Chief Nixon(R) ran the white flag up the pole and the US lost the war.
you have NO clue......it was the left Democrat Congress in 1975 who ran the white flag up the pole and the US lost the war.......Nixon wasn't President in 1975.
Call it "arm chair quarterbacking" if you like, but if we don't think critically about when, where and how we have committed our lives to fighting these battles, killing plenty others in the process too, we're not likely to fight future wars any better, and we're certainly not likely to avoid them any better either.
if we are going to fight the Cold War and communism aggression and attacks on OUR TROOPS constantly by the enemy then when and where you draw the line?
if Vietnam was a mistake like the left always say, then where do we draw the line and fight?....if not Vietnam then where, Korea? how about the rest of Asia? or we fight when it's too late and more people have to die.
If you are not willing to fight to win then don't fight the war at all....that's the lesson of Vietnam.
The mistake of Vietnam was that we didn't censor the press like we did WW 2 and the left divided this country politically and public opinion which harmed our war effort and sealed South Vietnam's fate in 1975 which was shameful after we promised them we will defend them from communism aggression........we had a mission in WW 2 to destroy Germany and Japan to surrender and we bombed the crap out of them and destroyed their cities and war machine, THAT'S IT!!!! NO violin and NO emotions for our enemies.
If Kennedy would not have supported the coup in the south, would the trajectory of the war have changed?
that would have helped.......but if Soviets were supplying North Vietnam then we had to supply South Vietnam bullet for bullet so they could defend themselves from communism aggression from the North.
Nixon got that in 1973 in the Paris agreement......then Nixon had to step down because of Watergate and the Communists in the North were testing the new President and they attacked small villages across the border and then when the Democrat Congress in 1975 refused to aid and supply South Vietnam for their defense it was over!!!! The North only had to march in with their tanks and take over Saigon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.