Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, legendary vietnamese freedom fighter, turns 100

[daveman]

Come on lefties. You know Jose is an off the charts left wing anti-American radical. Why do you support the notion that Giap was a hero? Is it a knee jerk reaction to the crap you have been taught in public school? Maybe Michael Savage was right. Liberalism is a mental illness.

Guess what?

Giaps side won. He led an army against overwhelming odds and won. Today, his country is independent and he is their George Washington. It's not anti American, it's the way things are

He won by default. And Saigon didn't fall until two years after we left.

You call that a victory?

 

[rightwinger]

Come on lefties. You know Jose is an off the charts left wing anti-American radical. Why do you support the notion that Giap was a hero? Is it a knee jerk reaction to the crap you have been taught in public school? Maybe Michael Savage was right. Liberalism is a mental illness.

Guess what?

Giaps side won. He led an army against overwhelming odds and won. Today, his country is independent and he is their George Washington. It's not anti American, it's the way things are

There it is folks, directly from rightwinger who is really a leftwinger. Giap's side won and therefore regardless of his ability as a general and his savage atrosities towards South Vietnamese civilians he should be considered to be on the same scale as George Washington. I rest my case about Michael Savage's opinion of liberalism.

Historically, Americans have always been able to respect the Generals we faced in war. In spite of their representing sides whose political views we abhor, we still admire their leadership skills. Generals like Lee, Jackson, Rommel and Admiral Yamamoto are admired..even though they were on the other side

 

[rightwinger]

The tactical reality of Giap's "leadership" was that he was a butcher who cared nothing about his troops. Why the left admires him as a hero is anyone's guess. The political reality was that LBJ was a fool who set the rules so that the US would win every battle and lose the war (during a republican administration). The bottom line is that Giap isn't a military hero but he might be considered a political hero to the radical left. Jose is off the charts but you would assume that saner Americans wouldn't be sending Giap birthday cards.

The tactical reality was that North Vietnam was willing to fight to the last man and we weren't. Why? Because it was their country. Just like the Russians lost millions more casualties than the Germans, they won because they were fighting for mother Russia.

So .....35 years later

What would have been the difference if we had won? Vietnam is now a US trade partner. US tourists visit frequently. Would it have been worth another 50,000 US lives to "win" Vietnam?

We don't know if North VietNam was willing to fight to the last man. General Giap's lack of leadership resulted in a million, one hundred thousand deaths under his command. It hardly qualifies him as the top ten of military leaders in history except in the minds of radical lefties who (I hate to say it) celebrated every US Military death in a war they considered illegal.

David fought Goliath and won.

 

[whitehall]

Guess what?

Giaps side won. He led an army against overwhelming odds and won. Today, his country is independent and he is their George Washington. It's not anti American, it's the way things are

There it is folks, directly from rightwinger who is really a leftwinger. Giap's side won and therefore regardless of his ability as a general and his savage atrosities towards South Vietnamese civilians he should be considered to be on the same scale as George Washington. I rest my case about Michael Savage's opinion of liberalism.

Historically, Americans have always been able to respect the Generals we faced in war. In spite of their representing sides whose political views we abhor, we still admire their leadership skills. Generals like Lee, Jackson, Rommel and Admiral Yamamoto are admired..even though they were on the other side

Actually we killed Yamamoto in a daring raid and Rommel was executed by his own people. Their tactics and leadership were admirable but what's to admire about a sniveling coward who got a Million one hundred thousand of his own people killed as cannon fodder?

 

[Patrick2]

Giap was a bloodthirsty communist who had no qualms at all at sending millions of his countrymen to their deaths in a war to establish a dictatorship, one which has left vietnam among the poorest countries on earth. But being bloodthirsty doesn't mean stupid.

My favorite quote from him is how he honestly admitted that the american leftwing won the war far for the communists - after main US troop bodies were gone in 1973, and the democrat congress refused to give any more money to south vietnam (continuing the now very familiar leftwing practice of abandoning our allies) he said the south vietnamese were forced to fight "a poor man's war". Eg, in the face of massive divisions of NVA surging southward, artllery firebases were told to shoot only two rounds a day.

 

[Patrick2]

There it is folks, directly from rightwinger who is really a leftwinger. Giap's side won and therefore regardless of his ability as a general and his savage atrosities towards South Vietnamese civilians he should be considered to be on the same scale as George Washington. I rest my case about Michael Savage's opinion of liberalism.

Historically, Americans have always been able to respect the Generals we faced in war. In spite of their representing sides whose political views we abhor, we still admire their leadership skills. Generals like Lee, Jackson, Rommel and Admiral Yamamoto are admired..even though they were on the other side

Actually we killed Yamamoto in a daring raid and Rommel was executed by his own people. Their tactics and leadership were admirable but what's to admire about a sniveling coward who got a Million one hundred thousand of his own people killed as cannon fodder?

In yamamoto's defense, he argued against the war against the US before the attack on Pearl Harbor, saying even militarily, it made no sense, implying that the US would inevitably win it.

 

[Sallow]

Come on lefties. You know Jose is an off the charts left wing anti-American radical. Why do you support the notion that Giap was a hero? Is it a knee jerk reaction to the crap you have been taught in public school? Maybe Michael Savage was right. Liberalism is a mental illness.

Guess what?

Giaps side won. He led an army against overwhelming odds and won. Today, his country is independent and he is their George Washington. It's not anti American, it's the way things are

There it is folks, directly from rightwinger who is really a leftwinger. Giap's side won and therefore regardless of his ability as a general and his savage atrosities towards South Vietnamese civilians he should be considered to be on the same scale as George Washington. I rest my case about Michael Savage's opinion of liberalism.

You just went on about over a million vietnamese military killed and talk about Vietnamese Atrocities? Oh gosh.

It was the US that was completely responsible for the deaths of several million Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian people.

And that's an atrocity.

 

[Sallow]

no, that won't work, the nor kors and the Chinese lost a huge number of men comparatively, in the Korean War, yet? we have a cease fire in effect for what? 50 years?

What about the Russians during WWII. Heck they lost millions. The Russian Front was a death sentence for Germans and Russians alike..

There are two factors necessary to declare military victory. Storming a fortified fortress is the worst case scenrio in combat but Ike was prepared to throw enough bodies into the Normandy meat grinder until the Allies established... real estate. That's the second element to calculating military victory...taking and keeping real estate. Germany took Russian real estate but couldn't wthistand the other element needed for military victory ...low casualites. LBJ decided to fight a war in VietNam where real estate wouldn't matter. Every hard fought acre the US gained was given away the next day or a week later. It's impossible to declare victory unless you occupy the real estate of the defeated force. LBJ almost pulled it off after Tet when the VC was so worn down that it had no more troops but he chickened out and gave it all away.

Sheesh..I hope you aren't teaching any class in history.

Nixon expanded the war by at least 2 degrees. He secretly bombed Laos and Cambodia.

 

[Trajan]

Guess what?

Giaps side won. He led an army against overwhelming odds and won. Today, his country is independent and he is their George Washington. It's not anti American, it's the way things are

There it is folks, directly from rightwinger who is really a leftwinger. Giap's side won and therefore regardless of his ability as a general and his savage atrosities towards South Vietnamese civilians he should be considered to be on the same scale as George Washington. I rest my case about Michael Savage's opinion of liberalism.

You just went on about over a million vietnamese military killed and talk about Vietnamese Atrocities? Oh gosh.

It was the US that was completely responsible for the deaths of several million Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian people.

And that's an atrocity.

how was that again?

 

[rightwinger]

The tactical reality of Giap's "leadership" was that he was a butcher who cared nothing about his troops. Why the left admires him as a hero is anyone's guess. The political reality was that LBJ was a fool who set the rules so that the US would win every battle and lose the war (during a republican administration). The bottom line is that Giap isn't a military hero but he might be considered a political hero to the radical left. Jose is off the charts but you would assume that saner Americans wouldn't be sending Giap birthday cards.

The tactical reality was that North Vietnam was willing to fight to the last man and we weren't. Why? Because it was their country. Just like the Russians lost millions more casualties than the Germans, they won because they were fighting for mother Russia.

So .....35 years later

What would have been the difference if we had won? Vietnam is now a US trade partner. US tourists visit frequently. Would it have been worth another 50,000 US lives to "win" Vietnam?

We don't know if North VietNam was willing to fight to the last man. General Giap's lack of leadership resulted in a million, one hundred thousand deaths under his command. It hardly qualifies him as the top ten of military leaders in history except in the minds of radical lefties who (I hate to say it) celebrated every US Military death in a war they considered illegal.

How was he responsible for one million deaths? Because he wouldn't surrender to the US?

He had a rudimentary military with poorly equipped forces. He faced the most powerful military on earth and fought them to a standstill. Tactics and perseverance countered the military might of the US
How do you hold off a force with airpower, communications and unlimited resources for seven years?

 

[Toome]

Sounds like this whole argument is pretty pointless.

As a leader, Giap probably rates right up there with other national heroes in terms of motivating followers and getting them to charge the hill. As a military tactician, he basically sucked. To give him credit for "winning" the Vietnam War is pretty disingenuous.

To put it in plain terms: the NVA never posed a serious military threat to the US military. It got its ass handed to them in every major battlefield engagement. The Tet Offensive was a huge military failure.

In political terms, Giap was pretty clever. He understood the strategy of perception over reality. This still didn't make him a brilliant military tactician. He understood that Washington did not have the will to deliver the killing blow, so he just waited us out no matter how many of his own people were killed in the process.

I don't hate the man. The war is over, and he was just some schmoe who did his job on his side of the fence while we did ours on our side of it.

 

[Patrick2]

Sounds like this whole argument is pretty pointless.

As a leader, Giap probably rates right up there with other national heroes in terms of motivating followers and getting them to charge the hill.

Is motivation other than "do what we tell you, or go to prison or worse" needed in a communist country?

 

[Mr.Owl]

not lookin to bad for 100!

 

[L.K.Eder]

Sounds like this whole argument is pretty pointless.

As a leader, Giap probably rates right up there with other national heroes in terms of motivating followers and getting them to charge the hill. As a military tactician, he basically sucked. To give him credit for "winning" the Vietnam War is pretty disingenuous.

To put it in plain terms: the NVA never posed a serious military threat to the US military. It got its ass handed to them in every major battlefield engagement. The Tet Offensive was a huge military failure.

In political terms, Giap was pretty clever. He understood the strategy of perception over reality. This still didn't make him a brilliant military tactician. He understood that Washington did not have the will to deliver the killing blow, so he just waited us out no matter how many of his own people were killed in the process.

I don't hate the man. The war is over, and he was just some schmoe who did his job on his side of the fence while we did ours on our side of it.

how about the battle of dien bien phu?

 

[daveman]

Sounds like this whole argument is pretty pointless.

As a leader, Giap probably rates right up there with other national heroes in terms of motivating followers and getting them to charge the hill. As a military tactician, he basically sucked. To give him credit for "winning" the Vietnam War is pretty disingenuous.

To put it in plain terms: the NVA never posed a serious military threat to the US military. It got its ass handed to them in every major battlefield engagement. The Tet Offensive was a huge military failure.

In political terms, Giap was pretty clever. He understood the strategy of perception over reality. This still didn't make him a brilliant military tactician. He understood that Washington did not have the will to deliver the killing blow, so he just waited us out no matter how many of his own people were killed in the process.

I don't hate the man. The war is over, and he was just some schmoe who did his job on his side of the fence while we did ours on our side of it.

how about the battle of dien bien phu?

"Leave the brave Communist alone!!"

 

[Toome]

how about the battle of dien bien phu?

I don't want to take anything away from the Viet-Minh. It takes a lot of smarts to recognize a weakness and exploit it fully.

However, the French had as much to do with some pretty stupid decision-making on their part.

I'm not the one who is trying to portray Giap as a military genius. He wasn't one. He wasn't an incompetent military officer. But he sure as hell didn't defeat the US on the battlefield.

Point here is that Vietnam was lost back home in the form of public opinion. Giap didn't orchestrate that. Give Ho Chi Minh the credit for knowing how Americans think and coming up with the strategy to target the American public rather than the American military.

I don't want to undersell Giap. He certainly had to have a head on his shoulders. But to give him credit for defeating the US military? Yeah, right. Uh, no. He did nothing of the sort.

 

[The Gadfly]

The tactical reality was that North Vietnam was willing to fight to the last man and we weren't. Why? Because it was their country. Just like the Russians lost millions more casualties than the Germans, they won because they were fighting for mother Russia.

So .....35 years later

What would have been the difference if we had won? Vietnam is now a US trade partner. US tourists visit frequently. Would it have been worth another 50,000 US lives to "win" Vietnam?

We don't know if North VietNam was willing to fight to the last man. General Giap's lack of leadership resulted in a million, one hundred thousand deaths under his command. It hardly qualifies him as the top ten of military leaders in history except in the minds of radical lefties who (I hate to say it) celebrated every US Military death in a war they considered illegal.

How was he responsible for one million deaths? Because he wouldn't surrender to the US?

He had a rudimentary military with poorly equipped forces. He faced the most powerful military on earth and fought them to a standstill. Tactics and perseverance countered the military might of the US
How do you hold off a force with airpower, communications and unlimited resources for seven years?

You are joking, right? You people on the Left amaze me. "Unlimited resources"? Oh, how I wish, but the truth is, all the really important targets were off-limits to air strikes, the VC and NVA could just run across some artificial line and regroup and replenish after we decimated them in battle, and we were not allowed to follow up; shall I continue? The long list of stupid, political restrictions we had to deal with is absolutely ridiculous, surreal, and a whole lot of other things that defy both sound military tactics and common sense. Giap may have been a mediocre commander, but what he was up against in McNamara and his "whiz kids" was an idiot brigade that handcuffed U.S. troops at every turn, while being worth at lest five divisions to the enemy on criminal stupidity and sheer gutlessness alone. I'd have loved to have some of those "geniuses" in the field; I think I would have put them on point, with a cowbell around their necks; they might have been good for something, that way. Robert S. McNamara owes every man who fought in Vietnam an apology, for not allowing us to do our job.

As for "another 50,000 dead", it wouldn't have cost us the first 58, 272 to do the job right, and bomb every target of military significance in North Vietnam into dust, and roll our armor across the border and crush Ho Chi Minh, and it would not have take so long to do that, either. All we needed was the orders; orders we never got, because of chickenshits back home. Fight the Chinese? I'd have loved to kill some of the communist bastards. Same for the Russians. Hell, given the way things turned out, I'd just as soon have laid waste to the whole damn country so that nothing could live in that shithole for the next 500 years. We might as well have done the same things the enemy did, since you Leftists constantly accuse us of doing that anyway. I really don't give a damn how many communists we killed; not enough, obviously.

By the way, Giap can STILL kiss my G.I. ass, and I wish him a painful and lingering death.