Clever Clogs
Posts: 651 
March 24th, 2006, 04:06 AM
[quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"]
[quote="Colpy"]
kind of like Abu Grahab(?) was not done on chain of command authority. Right! There were more 'Mai Lai type of massacres as a 'military strategy' just as torture continues in Iraq and around the world under US direction. Calley and that bunch were stressed-out grunts under orders to raise the body count and to sweep the area for VC. They were not protecting America from harm, they were protecting "assets" discovered off the coast of Viet Nam by seismic readings. Those findings have still not been shared with the current government of Viet Nam. And Giap was a soldier trying to free his nation from continued occupation.
[quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"]
[quote="Colpy"]
Quoting
RESPONSE: So you think the Mai Lai 'massacre' was a local platoon running amoc
There is a very fundamental difference between Mai Lai and the Tet Offensive murders.
Mai Lai was the result of a frustrated platoon under an idiot officer running amok. In fact, some civilians at Mai Lai were saved, and the massacre contained, by the heroic efforts of an American helicopter crew.
Calley should have bbeen executed, but there it is.
Tet was an organized, top down, efficient elimination of picked non-combatants. Nobody was tried, it was official policy.
Giap = Calley, except 50 times worse.
Mai Lai was the result of a frustrated platoon under an idiot officer running amok. In fact, some civilians at Mai Lai were saved, and the massacre contained, by the heroic efforts of an American helicopter crew.
Calley should have bbeen executed, but there it is.
Tet was an organized, top down, efficient elimination of picked non-combatants. Nobody was tried, it was official policy.
Giap = Calley, except 50 times worse.
kind of like Abu Grahab(?) was not done on chain of command authority. Right! There were more 'Mai Lai type of massacres as a 'military strategy' just as torture continues in Iraq and around the world under US direction. Calley and that bunch were stressed-out grunts under orders to raise the body count and to sweep the area for VC. They were not protecting America from harm, they were protecting "assets" discovered off the coast of Viet Nam by seismic readings. Those findings have still not been shared with the current government of Viet Nam. And Giap was a soldier trying to free his nation from continued occupation.
Bright Spark
Posts: 253
Location: Australia
Location: Australia
March 24th, 2006, 07:13 AM
Trotsky / Lenin / Stalin / Hitler / Castro / Arafat / Ghadaffi.... et al.
all of them seemed very 'popular' at the time...
I think Lenin was the least offensive of the abovementioned. Bolsheviks and bourgeois were always going to clash... Lenin did want peace at almost any cost, Which says something for his character. Things just dont always go your way in a revolution, do they?
I forgot Mussolini.... a facist revolutionist, very successful, and extremely popular with the italians (they deny it now though...) but he was a complete clusterfuhhhh. However.. at the time, they were all popular leaders and revolutionary, extermely popular and well encouraged by their countrymen and women. Not that it makes any of them better people, just more successful than others who have tried similar means to achieve an end.
Trotsky / Lenin / Stalin / Hitler / Castro / Arafat / Ghadaffi.... et al.
all of them seemed very 'popular' at the time...
I think Lenin was the least offensive of the abovementioned. Bolsheviks and bourgeois were always going to clash... Lenin did want peace at almost any cost, Which says something for his character. Things just dont always go your way in a revolution, do they?
I forgot Mussolini.... a facist revolutionist, very successful, and extremely popular with the italians (they deny it now though...) but he was a complete clusterfuhhhh. However.. at the time, they were all popular leaders and revolutionary, extermely popular and well encouraged by their countrymen and women. Not that it makes any of them better people, just more successful than others who have tried similar means to achieve an end.
Senate Member
Posts: 5,573 
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
March 24th, 2006, 09:54 AM
[quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"]
I did pretty extensive work on the beginnings of America's involvement in Vietnam in university. Ho Chi Minh was their FRIEND, and could have easily remained so, if he were not stabbed in the back by American pre-occupation with maintaining good relations with France. The Yanks feared communist strength in France (most of the rersistence to the Nazis were communists), and the Yanks were willing to do ANYTHING to keep the French happy, including stabbing Ho in the back and facilitating the return of the French colonial masters.
Ho was much more a nationalist than a communist. It is amazing, but the Vietnamese constitution he wrote very closely resembles the American constitution, by design. He took it to Archimedes Patty, his OSS controler, to make sure he got it right.
It seems the Americans missed a terrific opportunity to have a stable ally in south-east Asia starting right after WWII.
But who knows?
"What if?" is only a diversion.
[quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"]
Quoting
kind of like Abu Grahab(?) was not done on chain of command authority. Right! There were more 'Mai Lai type of massacres as a 'military strategy' just as torture continues in Iraq and around the world under US direction. Calley and that bunch were stressed-out grunts under orders to raise the body count and to sweep the area for VC. They were not protecting America from harm, they were protecting "assets" discovered off the coast of Viet Nam by seismic readings. Those findings have still not been shared with the current government of Viet Nam. And Giap was a soldier trying to free his nation from continued occupation.
I am certainly NOT trying to defend America's behaviour in Vietnam. It is indefensible. Quoting
RESPONSE: So you think the Mai Lai 'massacre' was a local platoon running amoc
There is a very fundamental difference between Mai Lai and the Tet Offensive murders.
Mai Lai was the result of a frustrated platoon under an idiot officer running amok. In fact, some civilians at Mai Lai were saved, and the massacre contained, by the heroic efforts of an American helicopter crew.
Calley should have bbeen executed, but there it is.
Tet was an organized, top down, efficient elimination of picked non-combatants. Nobody was tried, it was official policy.
Giap = Calley, except 50 times worse.
Mai Lai was the result of a frustrated platoon under an idiot officer running amok. In fact, some civilians at Mai Lai were saved, and the massacre contained, by the heroic efforts of an American helicopter crew.
Calley should have bbeen executed, but there it is.
Tet was an organized, top down, efficient elimination of picked non-combatants. Nobody was tried, it was official policy.
Giap = Calley, except 50 times worse.
kind of like Abu Grahab(?) was not done on chain of command authority. Right! There were more 'Mai Lai type of massacres as a 'military strategy' just as torture continues in Iraq and around the world under US direction. Calley and that bunch were stressed-out grunts under orders to raise the body count and to sweep the area for VC. They were not protecting America from harm, they were protecting "assets" discovered off the coast of Viet Nam by seismic readings. Those findings have still not been shared with the current government of Viet Nam. And Giap was a soldier trying to free his nation from continued occupation.
I did pretty extensive work on the beginnings of America's involvement in Vietnam in university. Ho Chi Minh was their FRIEND, and could have easily remained so, if he were not stabbed in the back by American pre-occupation with maintaining good relations with France. The Yanks feared communist strength in France (most of the rersistence to the Nazis were communists), and the Yanks were willing to do ANYTHING to keep the French happy, including stabbing Ho in the back and facilitating the return of the French colonial masters.
Ho was much more a nationalist than a communist. It is amazing, but the Vietnamese constitution he wrote very closely resembles the American constitution, by design. He took it to Archimedes Patty, his OSS controler, to make sure he got it right.
It seems the Americans missed a terrific opportunity to have a stable ally in south-east Asia starting right after WWII.
But who knows?
"What if?" is only a diversion.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 651
March 24th, 2006, 03:32 PM
[quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"]
[quote="Colpy"]
[quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"][quote="Colpy"][quote="PoisonPete2"]
[quote="Colpy"]
Quoting
RESPONSE: I think you are right on. Ho Che Mein got 1/2 million military packs the Americans didn't need after the surrender of Japan. They were to agitate against the Chinese. The return of France to Viet Nam was unexpected and left American diplomacy in a bind. The return of the Gaulists to French power was more than an irritant. General DeGaule was not much loved by the west. It was anticipated he would try to hold Algeria as his shadow government had operated out of Algiers, but the realitity of Colonialism was thought to be fading. So America was stuck supporting a French Viet Nam to a Billion dollars a year. And the rest is history with the industrial / military complex seeking a President they could push into war. Giap wanted a homeland free of foreign control. Don't we all?
..
It seems the Americans missed a terrific opportunity to have a stable ally in south-east Asia starting right after WWII.
But who knows?
"What if?" is only a diversion.
It seems the Americans missed a terrific opportunity to have a stable ally in south-east Asia starting right after WWII.
But who knows?
"What if?" is only a diversion.
