Should America have just allowed the vietcong to overrun the Southern Vietnam?

[Tuatara]

as I was typing ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Nam, like Iraq is another country we had no business fucking with ... sooner or later the damn war-dogs will figure out minding their own business is cheaper and far less lethal ..

Vietnam and Iraq are not really comparable. The USA had no national security concerns in Vietnam.

It was just another one of those unnecessary wars that the evil Democrats used as an excuse to enslave young Americans, throw them in a meat grinder and use them as cannon fodder while they enrich themselves.

Then a bit of sanity took over and America elected a Republican president in order to get us out of Vietnam. He had his faults, but that is one reason that Nixon should be commended.

Nixon supported and encouraged the war in Vietnam from the get go.

Bullshit.

Nixon was elected to END US involvement in the war. That is his most notable campaign promise. And he lived up to it.

He also, much to the chagrin of DNC apologists, abolished slavery in the USA.

THINK!

Not Bullshit. US had supported the French during their war years with Vietnam. The Eisenhower administration which Nixon was a part of were for sending millions of dollars to the french and the Republicans were always about supporting the war whether it was US involvement or the French.

As for Nixon's campaign promise, Johnson campaigned on US De-esculation in Vietnam. Looks like they both broke their promises. I noticed you completely ignored the article I presented in which Nixon himself kept the war going on longer than it should have.

The ridiculous blog article you linked to is garbage. Nobody who is not very ignorant of the subject takes it seriously.



THINK!

It's based on the transcripts of FBI wiretaps that were released to the public. The final ones were released on August 19, 2013.

 

[Muhammed]

Vietnam and Iraq are not really comparable. The USA had no national security concerns in Vietnam.

It was just another one of those unnecessary wars that the evil Democrats used as an excuse to enslave young Americans, throw them in a meat grinder and use them as cannon fodder while they enrich themselves.

Then a bit of sanity took over and America elected a Republican president in order to get us out of Vietnam. He had his faults, but that is one reason that Nixon should be commended.

Nixon supported and encouraged the war in Vietnam from the get go.

Bullshit.

Nixon was elected to END US involvement in the war. That is his most notable campaign promise. And he lived up to it.

He also, much to the chagrin of DNC apologists, abolished slavery in the USA.

THINK!

Not Bullshit. US had supported the French during their war years with Vietnam. The Eisenhower administration which Nixon was a part of were for sending millions of dollars to the french and the Republicans were always about supporting the war whether it was US involvement or the French.

As for Nixon's campaign promise, Johnson campaigned on US De-esculation in Vietnam. Looks like they both broke their promises. I noticed you completely ignored the article I presented in which Nixon himself kept the war going on longer than it should have.

The ridiculous blog article you linked to is garbage. Nobody who is not very ignorant of the subject takes it seriously.



THINK!

It's based on the transcripts of FBI wiretaps that were released to the public. The final ones were released on August 19, 2013.

It is based on no such thing.

 

[Tuatara]

Nixon supported and encouraged the war in Vietnam from the get go.

Bullshit.

Nixon was elected to END US involvement in the war. That is his most notable campaign promise. And he lived up to it.

He also, much to the chagrin of DNC apologists, abolished slavery in the USA.

THINK!

Not Bullshit. US had supported the French during their war years with Vietnam. The Eisenhower administration which Nixon was a part of were for sending millions of dollars to the french and the Republicans were always about supporting the war whether it was US involvement or the French.

As for Nixon's campaign promise, Johnson campaigned on US De-esculation in Vietnam. Looks like they both broke their promises. I noticed you completely ignored the article I presented in which Nixon himself kept the war going on longer than it should have.

The ridiculous blog article you linked to is garbage. Nobody who is not very ignorant of the subject takes it seriously.



THINK!

It's based on the transcripts of FBI wiretaps that were released to the public. The final ones were released on August 19, 2013.

It is based on no such thing.

Nrxt you're going to tell me the BBC and the Washington Post are blogs too.
Nixon’s long shadow
The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason' - BBC News

 

[Muhammed]

Bullshit.

Nixon was elected to END US involvement in the war. That is his most notable campaign promise. And he lived up to it.

He also, much to the chagrin of DNC apologists, abolished slavery in the USA.

THINK!

Not Bullshit. US had supported the French during their war years with Vietnam. The Eisenhower administration which Nixon was a part of were for sending millions of dollars to the french and the Republicans were always about supporting the war whether it was US involvement or the French.

As for Nixon's campaign promise, Johnson campaigned on US De-esculation in Vietnam. Looks like they both broke their promises. I noticed you completely ignored the article I presented in which Nixon himself kept the war going on longer than it should have.

The ridiculous blog article you linked to is garbage. Nobody who is not very ignorant of the subject takes it seriously.



THINK!

It's based on the transcripts of FBI wiretaps that were released to the public. The final ones were released on August 19, 2013.

It is based on no such thing.

Nrxt you're going to tell me the BBC and the Washington Post are blogs too.
Nixon’s long shadow
The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason' - BBC News

Those links do not support your assertions. You are simply ignorant of history. Period.

I gave you a free history lesson, however, some people are very hard learners. That's why they spend their life wallowing in ignorance.

 

[Tuatara]

Not Bullshit. US had supported the French during their war years with Vietnam. The Eisenhower administration which Nixon was a part of were for sending millions of dollars to the french and the Republicans were always about supporting the war whether it was US involvement or the French.

As for Nixon's campaign promise, Johnson campaigned on US De-esculation in Vietnam. Looks like they both broke their promises. I noticed you completely ignored the article I presented in which Nixon himself kept the war going on longer than it should have.

The ridiculous blog article you linked to is garbage. Nobody who is not very ignorant of the subject takes it seriously.



THINK!

It's based on the transcripts of FBI wiretaps that were released to the public. The final ones were released on August 19, 2013.

It is based on no such thing.

Nrxt you're going to tell me the BBC and the Washington Post are blogs too.
Nixon’s long shadow
The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason' - BBC News

Those links do not support your assertions. You are simply ignorant of history. Period.

I gave you a free history lesson, however, some people are very hard learners. That's why they spend their life wallowing in ignorance.

Yet the titles of those links are exactly what I stated. Time to move on.

 

[Muhammed]

The ridiculous blog article you linked to is garbage. Nobody who is not very ignorant of the subject takes it seriously.



THINK!

It's based on the transcripts of FBI wiretaps that were released to the public. The final ones were released on August 19, 2013.

It is based on no such thing.

Nrxt you're going to tell me the BBC and the Washington Post are blogs too.
Nixon’s long shadow
The Lyndon Johnson tapes: Richard Nixon's 'treason' - BBC News

Those links do not support your assertions. You are simply ignorant of history. Period.

I gave you a free history lesson, however, some people are very hard learners. That's why they spend their life wallowing in ignorance.

Yet the titles of those links are exactly what I stated. Time to move on.

Your unwise decision to remain ignorant is your choice alone.

 

[longknife]

So, the left continue to celebrate the genocide committed by the communists in South Vietnam.

They also never ever ever express any sort of disdain towards the genocide committed by any communist regime throughout history.


Ohhhh, but they sure are quick to point their pathetic bony pot stained fingers at America for having the unmitigated gall to stop the spread of tyranny.

This entire thread pretty much says that. They sure show their disgust towards America and none of them have expressed any disgust towards the vietcong or the khmer rouge.

Just towards America.


Can you believe it?

60,000 dead Americans

And the uncounted thousands of Vietnamese killed by the communist regime. Not counting the 2+ million slaughtered in Cambodia and unknown numbers in Laos.

 

[Theowl32]

Well, it is true. The pathetic left has shown that they were more offended by America trying to stop the spread of communism and that is what they were most offended by.

They have proven conclusively that not only do they not care about the genocide committed by the communists upon our withdrawal from Vietnam, but they celebrate to this day that America failed in that endeavor.

Then again, the pathetic left in this country has shown they fully support ALL genocide committed by communists throughout history.

Have you ever seen any of them condemn any of it? Neither have I.

 

[rightwinger]

So, the left continue to celebrate the genocide committed by the communists in South Vietnam.

They also never ever ever express any sort of disdain towards the genocide committed by any communist regime throughout history.


Ohhhh, but they sure are quick to point their pathetic bony pot stained fingers at America for having the unmitigated gall to stop the spread of tyranny.

This entire thread pretty much says that. They sure show their disgust towards America and none of them have expressed any disgust towards the vietcong or the khmer rouge.

Just towards America.


Can you believe it?

60,000 dead Americans

And the uncounted thousands of Vietnamese killed by the communist regime. Not counting the 2+ million slaughtered in Cambodia and unknown numbers in Laos.

Very true...there were unnecessary losses on both sides of the conflict

If we had stayed out of a Civil War it would have been quickly resolved with a small percentage of the losses....and we would have saved 60,000 of our soldiers

 

[Two Thumbs]

Is that what we should have done? Allowed the commies to spread around the world and overrun our allies?

Just in case you want to know what truly offended the left in this country.

Let us know what we should have done. Let us hear your plan. Not defend our allies like we did with South Korea (make no mistake, the left still think we were wrong for defending South Korea from the COMMUNISTS.)?

I say it is not that we defended the South Vietnam from the scumbag murdering communists. It is that we conducted the war from a political angle. We allowed the scumbags here to dictate foreign policy that eventually led to the killing fields and slaughter of millions. That, was what was immoral.

To me.

Lets hear it left wingers. Should America have not got involved at all and allowed the vietcong to just take over and murder our allies? Should we have allowed the spread of communism with out ANY sort of defense of any of our allies?

Go ahead and please explain it. Behold the double talk everyone.

We shouldn't have gotten involved in WW 1. That was not our business, not at fucking all.

But leftist wanted us to die for their cause, so they got us involved, and when we didn't want to go, they drafted us.

We learned it was a horrid idea.

But the left needed dead Americans and war to get out to the Great Depression, so off, by force, to WW 2.

That created the Cold war

And war, by Force in Korea and Viet Nam.


I'm tired of Americans dying for other people.

fuck them, they are ages overdue to lear to get along.

 

[eflatminor]

Is that what we should have done? Allowed the commies to spread around the world and overrun our allies?

Just in case you want to know what truly offended the left in this country.

Let us know what we should have done. Let us hear your plan. Not defend our allies like we did with South Korea (make no mistake, the left still think we were wrong for defending South Korea from the COMMUNISTS.)?

I say it is not that we defended the South Vietnam from the scumbag murdering communists. It is that we conducted the war from a political angle. We allowed the scumbags here to dictate foreign policy that eventually led to the killing fields and slaughter of millions. That, was what was immoral.

To me.

Lets hear it left wingers. Should America have not got involved at all and allowed the vietcong to just take over and murder our allies? Should we have allowed the spread of communism with out ANY sort of defense of any of our allies?

Go ahead and please explain it. Behold the double talk everyone.

While I'm clearly no 'left winger'...and I share your ire for scumbag murdering communists, I would say we should NOT have sent our boys to fight in Vietnam. For one, I do believe in involuntary service (aka, the draft). If US civilians really wanted to help the South Vietnamese, they were free to travel there and fight for that army. Secondly, I am confident the ideology of communism is so fundamentally flawed, it will always fail, just as we see it doing so today. Lastly, I do not think America should go looking for monsters to destroy. Protect our borders and let the rest of the world work out their own mess.

 

[Theowl32]

Is that what we should have done? Allowed the commies to spread around the world and overrun our allies?

Just in case you want to know what truly offended the left in this country.

Let us know what we should have done. Let us hear your plan. Not defend our allies like we did with South Korea (make no mistake, the left still think we were wrong for defending South Korea from the COMMUNISTS.)?

I say it is not that we defended the South Vietnam from the scumbag murdering communists. It is that we conducted the war from a political angle. We allowed the scumbags here to dictate foreign policy that eventually led to the killing fields and slaughter of millions. That, was what was immoral.

To me.

Lets hear it left wingers. Should America have not got involved at all and allowed the vietcong to just take over and murder our allies? Should we have allowed the spread of communism with out ANY sort of defense of any of our allies?

Go ahead and please explain it. Behold the double talk everyone.

While I'm clearly no 'left winger'...and I share your ire for scumbag murdering communists, I would say we should NOT have sent our boys to fight in Vietnam. For one, I do believe in involuntary service (aka, the draft). If US civilians really wanted to help the South Vietnamese, they were free to travel there and fight for that army. Secondly, I am confident the ideology of communism is so fundamentally flawed, it will always fail, just as we see it doing so today. Lastly, I do not think America should go looking for monsters to destroy. Protect our borders and let the rest of the world work out their own mess.

This has been a common sentiment shared by many dating back to the inception of this country. It is a common sentiment dating back to ancient times.

There is more than one reason why conflicts do happen and why it is not prudent just to abandon our allies etc. The most popular example of appeasement is the one that we always bring up. It is the reason why the League of Nations was dissolved and the reason why we had to deal with what had to deal with in hitler. We saw the price of not getting involved and the price the world pays for ignoring the rise of a tyrant.

Make no mistake, every president dating back to Washington had to deal with world events. Merchants in this country depend heavily on trade. Building allies with trade partners complicates issues greatly. It is not as simple as just ignoring what goes on in the world. It really is not. Sure seems like a good idea and in my ignorant days I use to think the same way.

The point of this thread was not about whether or not we should have been involved in Vietnam. It is what offended the left wingers. Not the PAWNS mind you. You know, the Hanoi Janes or the pot head college students thinking they were all on the side of "peace."

No, this is about what offended those communists that had clearly infiltrated the deepest parts of our government and our entertainment industry. Those elements in THIS COUNTRY were offended by US preventing the spread of the tyrannical communist expansion.

Why? CAUSE THEY WERE COMMUNISTS. THEY ARE COMMUNISTS. McCarthy btw was shown that he was actually quite vindicated in his level of paranoia. That was proven by testimony by EX KGB agents in the Venona Papers. It was very much understood long before McCarthy came into the picture. The infiltration dates back to the 30s or even before. Turn of the century really.

The inception of the ACLU founded by Roger Baldwin who was a staunch communist. Influenced by the likes of the Emma Goldmans of the world.

What we are seeing now is the full CHANGE of our government and our paradigm into full blown MARXISM. The march of the world into a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT under the guise of "SOCIALISM." Pure socialism IS COMMUNISM.

The point is what we see from the Vietnam conflict. AMERICA IS BLAMED by those elements. They never ever bring up the barbarism of the communists as they raged across the land. They certainly hardly ever bring up the GENOCIDE committed by these murderous regimes.

Why do you suppose they are so quick to BLAME AMERICA and hardly say a PEEP about the mass murders?

 

[Camp]

Is that what we should have done? Allowed the commies to spread around the world and overrun our allies?

Just in case you want to know what truly offended the left in this country.

Let us know what we should have done. Let us hear your plan. Not defend our allies like we did with South Korea (make no mistake, the left still think we were wrong for defending South Korea from the COMMUNISTS.)?

I say it is not that we defended the South Vietnam from the scumbag murdering communists. It is that we conducted the war from a political angle. We allowed the scumbags here to dictate foreign policy that eventually led to the killing fields and slaughter of millions. That, was what was immoral.

To me.

Lets hear it left wingers. Should America have not got involved at all and allowed the vietcong to just take over and murder our allies? Should we have allowed the spread of communism with out ANY sort of defense of any of our allies?

Go ahead and please explain it. Behold the double talk everyone.

While I'm clearly no 'left winger'...and I share your ire for scumbag murdering communists, I would say we should NOT have sent our boys to fight in Vietnam. For one, I do believe in involuntary service (aka, the draft). If US civilians really wanted to help the South Vietnamese, they were free to travel there and fight for that army. Secondly, I am confident the ideology of communism is so fundamentally flawed, it will always fail, just as we see it doing so today. Lastly, I do not think America should go looking for monsters to destroy. Protect our borders and let the rest of the world work out their own mess.

The Domino Theory was believed and a viable threat. Communists were supporting revolutions in not only Asia but South Ameria and Africa as well. This was a time when sanctions had little if any effect and it was thought that the only way to stop communist expansion was through military means. Right or wrong, that was the mindset of the times. Failure to address Vietnam would have caused the complete takeover of Indo-China and placed Thailand as the next Domino.
Many of the time viewed Vietnam as the last battle of WWII, a continuation of the Korean War and a pressure valve for the Cold War.

 

[Tuatara]

This has been a common sentiment shared by many dating back to the inception of this country. It is a common sentiment dating back to ancient times.

There is more than one reason why conflicts do happen and why it is not prudent just to abandon our allies etc.

Even if the allies are wrong? Completely wrong?

The most popular example of appeasement is the one that we always bring up. It is the reason why the League of Nations was dissolved and the reason why we had to deal with what had to deal with in hitler. We saw the price of not getting involved and the price the world pays for ignoring the rise of a tyrant.

But in the case of Vietnam, France, The US and to a smaller degree Britain were the tyrants. In the US they worship the people who fought against the colonialism of British Rule. When other countries do the exact same thing you simply charge them as communists to vindicate any slaughter against them. After WW2 The US, France and Britain do not recognize the Republic of Vietnam. Instead France send troops in. Ho Chi Mihn allows the troops in providing they recognize their independence. The French break down the negoiations and install a puppet government in the South. Ho Chi Mihn gets no support from France and their allies but support then in turn comes from China and the USSR.

The point of this thread was not about whether or not we should have been involved in Vietnam.

The title of the thread is about letting the Vietcong overrun the South, which is a ridiculous premise. The border between the 2 Vietnam's was drawn by France. It's not like everyone living north of the border were communists and everyone living south of the border were allies of the west. Most of the people on both sides were fighting for independence

It is what offended the left wingers. Not the PAWNS mind you. You know, the Hanoi Janes or the pot head college students thinking they were all on the side of "peace."

No, this is about what offended those communists that had clearly infiltrated the deepest parts of our government and our entertainment industry. Those elements in THIS COUNTRY were offended by US preventing the spread of the tyrannical communist expansion.

It was not a tyrannical communist expansion. The allies left no choice for the North Vietnamese to deal with anyone but the Communists. During WW2 the allies worked with the communists. Both France and Britain had communists serving in their government. Ho Ch Mihn was a well educated person who studied various political and economic strategies. His Declaration of Independence was a copy of the United States.

Why? CAUSE THEY WERE COMMUNISTS. THEY ARE COMMUNISTS. McCarthy btw was shown that he was actually quite vindicated in his level of paranoia.

Thet were forced to deal with communists because the west wouldn't recognize their state and the west was too busy trying to run their country.

That was proven by testimony by EX KGB agents in the Venona Papers. It was very much understood long before McCarthy came into the picture. The infiltration dates back to the 30s or even before. Turn of the century really.

To many countries the world communist didn't mean the big scary bogeyman like it does to the US. Their were definitely elements of communism in the early stages of Vietnam's independence. We know Ho Chi Mihn studied in China and the USSR. But he also studied in Britain, France and the US.

The inception of the ACLU founded by Roger Baldwin who was a staunch communist. Influenced by the likes of the Emma Goldmans of the world.

What does this have to do with Vietnam.

What we are seeing now is the full CHANGE of our government and our paradigm into full blown MARXISM. The march of the world into a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT under the guise of "SOCIALISM." Pure socialism IS COMMUNISM.

No you are not. Every government in the world has various aspects of socialism. Socialism is not Communism. Rabid paranoia and completely not understanding political and social-economic labels is the only thing you have achieved in these post.

The point is what we see from the Vietnam conflict. AMERICA IS BLAMED by those elements. They never ever bring up the barbarism of the communists as they raged across the land. They certainly hardly ever bring up the GENOCIDE committed by these murderous regimes.

Why do you suppose they are so quick to BLAME AMERICA and hardly say a PEEP about the mass murders?

Well for one thing you keep getting everyone mixed up. You will first talk about the Vietcong and the switch to the Khmer Rouge and the drop of a hat as if they were the same thing. May I suggest you actually read the history on how the Vietnam war started. Go back even before WW2. There is no living intelligent human that believes the US & France were not at complete fault for the lives lost during the Vietnam war.

 

[Theowl32]

This has been a common sentiment shared by many dating back to the inception of this country. It is a common sentiment dating back to ancient times.

There is more than one reason why conflicts do happen and why it is not prudent just to abandon our allies etc.

Even if the allies are wrong? Completely wrong?

The most popular example of appeasement is the one that we always bring up. It is the reason why the League of Nations was dissolved and the reason why we had to deal with what had to deal with in hitler. We saw the price of not getting involved and the price the world pays for ignoring the rise of a tyrant.

But in the case of Vietnam, France, The US and to a smaller degree Britain were the tyrants. In the US they worship the people who fought against the colonialism of British Rule. When other countries do the exact same thing you simply charge them as communists to vindicate any slaughter against them. After WW2 The US, France and Britain do not recognize the Republic of Vietnam. Instead France send troops in. Ho Chi Mihn allows the troops in providing they recognize their independence. The French break down the negoiations and install a puppet government in the South. Ho Chi Mihn gets no support from France and their allies but support then in turn comes from China and the USSR.

The point of this thread was not about whether or not we should have been involved in Vietnam.

The title of the thread is about letting the Vietcong overrun the South, which is a ridiculous premise. The border between the 2 Vietnam's was drawn by France. It's not like everyone living north of the border were communists and everyone living south of the border were allies of the west. Most of the people on both sides were fighting for independence

It is what offended the left wingers. Not the PAWNS mind you. You know, the Hanoi Janes or the pot head college students thinking they were all on the side of "peace."

No, this is about what offended those communists that had clearly infiltrated the deepest parts of our government and our entertainment industry. Those elements in THIS COUNTRY were offended by US preventing the spread of the tyrannical communist expansion.

It was not a tyrannical communist expansion. The allies left no choice for the North Vietnamese to deal with anyone but the Communists. During WW2 the allies worked with the communists. Both France and Britain had communists serving in their government. Ho Ch Mihn was a well educated person who studied various political and economic strategies. His Declaration of Independence was a copy of the United States.

Why? CAUSE THEY WERE COMMUNISTS. THEY ARE COMMUNISTS. McCarthy btw was shown that he was actually quite vindicated in his level of paranoia.

Thet were forced to deal with communists because the west wouldn't recognize their state and the west was too busy trying to run their country.

That was proven by testimony by EX KGB agents in the Venona Papers. It was very much understood long before McCarthy came into the picture. The infiltration dates back to the 30s or even before. Turn of the century really.

To many countries the world communist didn't mean the big scary bogeyman like it does to the US. Their were definitely elements of communism in the early stages of Vietnam's independence. We know Ho Chi Mihn studied in China and the USSR. But he also studied in Britain, France and the US.

The inception of the ACLU founded by Roger Baldwin who was a staunch communist. Influenced by the likes of the Emma Goldmans of the world.

What does this have to do with Vietnam.

What we are seeing now is the full CHANGE of our government and our paradigm into full blown MARXISM. The march of the world into a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT under the guise of "SOCIALISM." Pure socialism IS COMMUNISM.

No you are not. Every government in the world has various aspects of socialism. Socialism is not Communism. Rabid paranoia and completely not understanding political and social-economic labels is the only thing you have achieved in these post.

The point is what we see from the Vietnam conflict. AMERICA IS BLAMED by those elements. They never ever bring up the barbarism of the communists as they raged across the land. They certainly hardly ever bring up the GENOCIDE committed by these murderous regimes.

Why do you suppose they are so quick to BLAME AMERICA and hardly say a PEEP about the mass murders?

Well for one thing you keep getting everyone mixed up. You will first talk about the Vietcong and the switch to the Khmer Rouge and the drop of a hat as if they were the same thing. May I suggest you actually read the history on how the Vietnam war started. Go back even before WW2. There is no living intelligent human that believes the US & France were not at complete fault for the lives lost during the Vietnam war.

Holy shit.

Stalin was the innocent one? The vietcong were actually good people and America and South Vietnam were the tyrants?

This piece of unreal shit just keeps proving me right.

I am telling you all right now folks. The left wing in this country are bloated arrogant morons and they are very dangerous.

 

[Picaro]

The Domino Theory was believed and a viable threat. Communists were supporting revolutions in not only Asia but South Ameria and Africa as well. This was a time when sanctions had little if any effect and it was thought that the only way to stop communist expansion was through military means. Right or wrong, that was the mindset of the times. Failure to address Vietnam would have caused the complete takeover of Indo-China and placed Thailand as the next Domino.
Many of the time viewed Vietnam as the last battle of WWII, a continuation of the Korean War and a pressure valve for the Cold War.

Indeed. Stalin immediately rejected compliance with the Yalta agreements re Poland and the other eastern European states, and launched an expansionist program of establishing military puppet regimes in every country he occupied, not just Poland, but Azerbaijan and occupied northern Iran, Iran wasn't even a combatant state, and refused to leave, and this was before Japan had surrendered, even. The isolationists were wrong about both wars, and they were dead wrong about Viet Nam, too; the SEATO alliance was the only treaty organization that could fill the vacuum left by the end of colonialism in Asia, and the U.S. the only power who could stand up to Stalin and Mao. The isolationists like to pretend they could go back to hiding under their beds and just ignore the rest of the world, despite the fact that fantasy policy would result in far bigger wars at a much more horrendous cost in mere decades.

That policy didn't even make it through Jefferson's first term as President, and he was the biggest promoter of 'Neutrality'. If he saw the folly of it when the world was a much bigger place and our enemies much further away time wise, it shouldn't be rocket science to see the folly of it now. FDR saw it in WW I. There is no hiding from wars and imperialists; you can stop them early, before they get too big, or you wait and lose many times more blood later.

 

[Picaro]

This has been a common sentiment shared by many dating back to the inception of this country. It is a common sentiment dating back to ancient times.

There is more than one reason why conflicts do happen and why it is not prudent just to abandon our allies etc.

Even if the allies are wrong? Completely wrong?

The most popular example of appeasement is the one that we always bring up. It is the reason why the League of Nations was dissolved and the reason why we had to deal with what had to deal with in hitler. We saw the price of not getting involved and the price the world pays for ignoring the rise of a tyrant.

But in the case of Vietnam, France, The US and to a smaller degree Britain were the tyrants. In the US they worship the people who fought against the colonialism of British Rule. When other countries do the exact same thing you simply charge them as communists to vindicate any slaughter against them. After WW2 The US, France and Britain do not recognize the Republic of Vietnam. Instead France send troops in. Ho Chi Mihn allows the troops in providing they recognize their independence. The French break down the negoiations and install a puppet government in the South. Ho Chi Mihn gets no support from France and their allies but support then in turn comes from China and the USSR.

The point of this thread was not about whether or not we should have been involved in Vietnam.

The title of the thread is about letting the Vietcong overrun the South, which is a ridiculous premise. The border between the 2 Vietnam's was drawn by France. It's not like everyone living north of the border were communists and everyone living south of the border were allies of the west. Most of the people on both sides were fighting for independence

It is what offended the left wingers. Not the PAWNS mind you. You know, the Hanoi Janes or the pot head college students thinking they were all on the side of "peace."

No, this is about what offended those communists that had clearly infiltrated the deepest parts of our government and our entertainment industry. Those elements in THIS COUNTRY were offended by US preventing the spread of the tyrannical communist expansion.

It was not a tyrannical communist expansion. The allies left no choice for the North Vietnamese to deal with anyone but the Communists. During WW2 the allies worked with the communists. Both France and Britain had communists serving in their government. Ho Ch Mihn was a well educated person who studied various political and economic strategies. His Declaration of Independence was a copy of the United States.

Why? CAUSE THEY WERE COMMUNISTS. THEY ARE COMMUNISTS. McCarthy btw was shown that he was actually quite vindicated in his level of paranoia.

Thet were forced to deal with communists because the west wouldn't recognize their state and the west was too busy trying to run their country.

That was proven by testimony by EX KGB agents in the Venona Papers. It was very much understood long before McCarthy came into the picture. The infiltration dates back to the 30s or even before. Turn of the century really.

To many countries the world communist didn't mean the big scary bogeyman like it does to the US. Their were definitely elements of communism in the early stages of Vietnam's independence. We know Ho Chi Mihn studied in China and the USSR. But he also studied in Britain, France and the US.

The inception of the ACLU founded by Roger Baldwin who was a staunch communist. Influenced by the likes of the Emma Goldmans of the world.

What does this have to do with Vietnam.

What we are seeing now is the full CHANGE of our government and our paradigm into full blown MARXISM. The march of the world into a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT under the guise of "SOCIALISM." Pure socialism IS COMMUNISM.

No you are not. Every government in the world has various aspects of socialism. Socialism is not Communism. Rabid paranoia and completely not understanding political and social-economic labels is the only thing you have achieved in these post.

The point is what we see from the Vietnam conflict. AMERICA IS BLAMED by those elements. They never ever bring up the barbarism of the communists as they raged across the land. They certainly hardly ever bring up the GENOCIDE committed by these murderous regimes.

Why do you suppose they are so quick to BLAME AMERICA and hardly say a PEEP about the mass murders?

Well for one thing you keep getting everyone mixed up. You will first talk about the Vietcong and the switch to the Khmer Rouge and the drop of a hat as if they were the same thing. May I suggest you actually read the history on how the Vietnam war started. Go back even before WW2. There is no living intelligent human that believes the US & France were not at complete fault for the lives lost during the Vietnam war.

Holy shit.

Stalin was the innocent one? The vietcong were actually good people and America and South Vietnam were the tyrants?

This piece of unreal shit just keeps proving me right.

I am telling you all right now folks. The left wing in this are bloated arrogant morons and it very dangerous.

You can just ignore these psychos; they aren't to be taken seriously at all. They'll go away if they can't get any attention for their venal idiocy and ignorant tropes.

 

[HenryBHough]

Nam was doomed from the day the "war" that was not a war started under a president who could not comprehend that wars are for winning. We get a lot of those.

 

[Camp]

Nam was doomed from the day the "war" that was not a war started under a president who could not comprehend that wars are for winning. We get a lot of those.

Ya, because Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy didn't understand war, is that what you are saying?

 

[Tuatara]

Holy shit.

Stalin was the innocent one? .

Did not say that at all. Please point out where I stated that.

The vietcong were actually good people and America and South Vietnam were the tyrants?

I merely pointed out that the whole war could have been avoided if the US, France and Britain allowed Vietnam their Independence back in 1946.