Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Annie, Oct 19, 2006.
What a bunch of crap!!
In Vietnam, the US enemy was 20% communism and 80% vietnamese nationalism.
Many vietnamese perceived the US as the succesor of Japanese and French colonial rule: a foreign army of occupation preventing Vietnam from having self determination.
I personally believe the US had, by far, the best social project for Vietnam and you only have to compare South Korea and Vietnam to reach the same conclusion but the fact that vietnamese nationalism was the main cause of that conflict is an irrefutable historical fact.
Many vietcong fighters said at the time:
Im not a communist, Im a nationalist. I want all foreign troops to leave Vietnam.
The fact that nationalism was the main driving force behind that conflict is precisely the reason why the Vietnam War would survive the end of the Cold War: it had little to do with communism to begin with.
The reunification of the country was such an overriding concern for many people that the struggle would continue even if the US invaded NV and took over Hanoi.
If America stayed the course in that country, there would still be a separate country in the south but you can bet your ass that american soldiers would still be killing and dying in the jungles of Vietnam.
Your perspective is very North Vietnamese...ask the fleeing South Vietnamese if they felt the same.
You can find hundreds of thousands of afghans who supported the soviet occupation of their country because they regarded communism as a lesser evil than islamic fundamentalism preached by many afghan fighters.
History proved them right: the soviets left and the country did become a theocracy.
But this doesnt change the HISTORICAL fact that afghan nationalism and not religious fundamentalism was the main driving force of the conflict, the unifying factor that unified many afghans (secularists and fundamentalists alike) towards the common goal of expelling the invaders from their country.
Similarly, you can find hundreds of thousands of vietnamese who supported the american occupation of their country because they regarded the occupation as a lesser evil than the communist ideology preached by NV.
History also proved them right: America left and the country did become a communist dictatorship.
But this doesnt change the HISTORICAL fact that vietnamese nationalism and not communism was the main driving force of the conflict, the unifying factor that unified many vietnamese (north and south, those who were communists and those who were simply nationalists) towards the common goal of expelling the foreign troops and unifying the country.
Sez you....the reverse of your argument is just as valid. The fact that lack of US resolve resulted in a win for the communist backed north does not mean that the nationalistic philosophy was the driving force nor the primary factor in a victory...it had a lot more to do with lack of US resolve. If the US and the south had won (and they could well have had they stuck it out despite the furor going on internal to the US), the propaganda opposite yours would be valid.
Where did you get the 80% (20%) numbers anyway. I would be very interested in seeing that source.
Here is an interesting study relating to what Jose is saying:
It is interesting to note that the CIA's view was the Vietnam was essentially a civil war....that there were competing views of communist nationalism, that Diem led a minority Catholic government in a largely Buddist country which made it unpopular....lots of interesting stuff.
As with most things, it is and was a complex situation. Nationalism, as such, was merely one more factor (which ever side of Jose's hypothesis you are on).
You put these side by side and you get to see the larger truth of what won/lost that war.
The Vietnamese had far more at stake in that conflict than the average American, which was a very big reason things turned out like they did.
Also, the same people who say there is no comparison between Iraq and VN can't turn around and later make comparison between Iraq and VN...
and this means what?
There are some similarities and some dissimilarities. There are similarities between Vietnam and the American Revolution. There are similarities between Iraq and the US Civil War. So what?
The most glaring similarity is the left's use of the media attempting to brainwash the general public that we are losing in Iraq. It worked in Vietnam. It remains to be seen if the same ploy will succeed in the info age.
The fact is, Cronkite said the war was unwinnable following Tet, and the left in this country packed it in, when the fact is, the Viet Cong and NVA got their asses KICKED bigtime. The NLF (Viet Cong) ceased to exist as an effective organization, and the NVA couldn't field an army for a year.
The islamic nutjobs in Iraq are ramping up their attacks in hopes of affecting the elections next month. It'll be pathetic if it works.
Separate names with a comma.