VietNam..April 30th....How It Ended.

[Oldguy]

VietNam..April 30th....How It Ended

Many things can be said about the way it ended.
"Badly" comes to mind as well as "not soon enough"
Way to many American lives were lost for no apparent reason.
We gained nothing by fighting in that country.

We gained precisely nothing by fighting there and the effects of it are still being felt today.

But, who could have known that then?

How about all those people that were protesting the war. I believe they had a clue.

I doubt most of them did. Protesting was a social event and a good way to get laid for the majority.

 

[konradv]

1. Let's note in passing that you have not one gripe with the construction of the OP....because not only is every item correct...but the conclusion is indisputable.

So....what remains for you?
Yup.....try to change the subject.


2. Now...that particular subject....a terrific fall-back for a Leftist, 'cause you have been trained to respond to the phrase 'Kent State' similarly to the efforts of Pavlov, with his subjects.




And this is largely because you don't know what you think you know....I'm reminded of the saying about how mushrooms are raised.


3. The folks who control the information that leads you down the primrose path, are the same ones who brought you the upheavals of the 60's.

Instructive of the movement is the new evidence released by the FBI as to the causes of the Kent State shootings of 1970.
“Previously undisclosed FBI documents suggest that the Kent State antiwar protests were more meticulously planned than originally thought and that one or more gunshots may have been fired at embattled Ohio National Guardsmen before their killings of four students and woundings of at least nine others on that searing day in May 1970….

Yet the declassified FBI files show the FBI already had developed credible evidence suggesting that there was indeed a sniper and that one or more shots may have been fired at the guardsmen first….And a memorandum sent to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover on May 19, 1970, referred to bullet holes found in a tree and a statue — evidence, the report stated, that “indicated that at least two shots had been fired at the National Guard.”
New light shed on Kent State killings - Washington Times


4. For perspective, consider the famous Weathermen ‘Days of Rage’ protests of the Chicago 7 trial in October 1969. Planned as war in the streets, even the Black Panthers decided that these folks were too psychotic even for them. Fred Hampton, deputy chairman of the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party (BPP), said “We oppose the anarchistic, adventuristic, chauvinistic, individualistic, masochistic, Custeristic Weathermen.”
Susan Braudy, “Family Circle: The Boudins and the Aristocracy of the Left,: p. 188

a. Too nuts for the Black Panthers, but they became respected advisors and co-authors to the current Democratic President.



b. At a 1969 “War Council” in Flint, Michigan, Bernardine Dohrn gave her most memorable and notorious speech to her followers. Holding her fingers in what became the Weatherman “fork salute,” she said of the bloody murders recently committed by the Manson Family in which the pregnant actress Sharon Tate and a Folgers Coffee heiress and several other inhabitants of a Benedict Canyon mansion were brutally stabbed to death: “Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!” Bernardine Dohrn - Discover the Networks


5. So...these are the folks that serve as teachers to you Leftists?
At other rallies, Dohrn said, "Bring the revolution home, kill your parents -- that's where it's at."


How very easy it is to lead the uninformed.

You're the truly uninformed. The whole reason why there was a war in Viet Nam is because we failed to allow democracy to take its course. We backed a minority regime that refused to allow a plebiscite on reunification and the rest, as they say, is history.

The reference to 'uninformed' was of your changing of the subject to Kent State.

But, you know that....don't you.

If the National Guard had been fired upon as the FBI states....that changes things, doesn't it?
And, since you were unaware of same, that pretty much proves who was uninformed.

There's all sorts of uninformed. You're uninformed and passing it along by ignoring the basis for the war.

 

[editec]

WE lost in South VeitNam and still

no dominos fell.​

Instead we have become a valued trading partner with the communists that we so feared.

Which means people my age knew one fuck of a lot of our generation who

died for a lie​

 

[PoliticalChic]

You're the truly uninformed. The whole reason why there was a war in Viet Nam is because we failed to allow democracy to take its course. We backed a minority regime that refused to allow a plebiscite on reunification and the rest, as they say, is history.

The reference to 'uninformed' was of your changing of the subject to Kent State.

But, you know that....don't you.

If the National Guard had been fired upon as the FBI states....that changes things, doesn't it?
And, since you were unaware of same, that pretty much proves who was uninformed.

There's all sorts of uninformed. You're uninformed and passing it along by ignoring the basis for the war.

You brought up Kent State.

It was your attempt to change the subject.

I'll accept your acknowledgement that you didn't know the details of the incident.

Do you do so?



Now...if I can open a larger can of worms.....the real 'basis for the war' was the Roosevelt-Truman administrations' infiltration by communists, who gave aid to Mao, and opposed nationalist Chiang Kai-shek


No Mao, no communist China, no Viet Nam war.


But, heck....you're probably not even here today....you must be out celebrating May Day....

 

[konradv]

The reference to 'uninformed' was of your changing of the subject to Kent State.

But, you know that....don't you.

If the National Guard had been fired upon as the FBI states....that changes things, doesn't it?
And, since you were unaware of same, that pretty much proves who was uninformed.

There's all sorts of uninformed. You're uninformed and passing it along by ignoring the basis for the war.

You brought up Kent State.

It was your attempt to change the subject.

I'll accept your acknowledgement that you didn't know the details of the incident.

Do you do so?

Now...if I can open a larger can of worms.....the real 'basis for the war' was the Roosevelt-Truman administrations' infiltration by communists, who gave aid to Mao, and opposed nationalist Chiang Kai-shek

No Mao, no communist China, no Viet Nam war.

But, heck....you're probably not even here today....you must be out celebrating May Day....

Your ignorance is astounding. We supported Chiang at every turn. If he lost, it was his own fault.

As for Viet Nam, the north was supported by the USSR, not China. China was their traditional enemy. Regardless of whether Mao won or not, Ho Che Mihn was a nationalist who would have tried to oust the French or any other power.

Why do I bring up Kent State? To counter your one-sided analysis of the war. Not everyone that opposed it was a Communist.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There's all sorts of uninformed. You're uninformed and passing it along by ignoring the basis for the war.

You brought up Kent State.

It was your attempt to change the subject.

I'll accept your acknowledgement that you didn't know the details of the incident.

Do you do so?

Now...if I can open a larger can of worms.....the real 'basis for the war' was the Roosevelt-Truman administrations' infiltration by communists, who gave aid to Mao, and opposed nationalist Chiang Kai-shek

No Mao, no communist China, no Viet Nam war.

But, heck....you're probably not even here today....you must be out celebrating May Day....

Your ignorance is astounding. We supported Chiang at every turn. If he lost, it was his own fault.

As for Viet Nam, the north was supported by the USSR, not China. China was their traditional enemy. Regardless of whether Mao won or not, Ho Che Mihn was a nationalist who would have tried to oust the French or any other power.

Why do I bring up Kent State? To counter your one-sided analysis of the war. Not everyone that opposed it was a Communist.

I'm actually beginning to enjoy proving what a dullard you are.


As your education, as well as that of tecy's, is near and dear to my heart, take the following down:
Both Roosevelt and Truman relied on the Institute of Pacific Relations for direction in dealing with China. The icon of the IPC was communist Owen Lattimore. The Institute was riddled with communists.

Further, so were the two administrations, and Treasury, specifically, held back loans promised to Chiang Kai-shek.

I will provide some links below...but, I look forward to the day when you guys will realize that I am never wrong.



1. . From the book “Blacklisted From History,” by M. Stanton Evans: Soviet agents in the U.S. State department (and Treasury) worked actively to damage confidence of our government, in the (Nationalist) Chinese fighting in their own country, as our allies against the Japanese, and in favor of the Communist insurgency of Mao Tse-Tung and Chou En-Lai.
While Chiang Kai-Shek was busy as our ally fighting the Japanese, White, Currie, Coe, Glasser, and Hiss were doing all they could to undermine him in favor of Mao and the communists.


2. .[Owen] Lattimore was a scholar of Chinese history who taught at Johns Hopkins University. During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed him as a special representative to the Nationalist Chinese government of Chiang Kai-Shek. Lattimore also served in the Office of War Information. His troubles began after the war, when it became apparent that Chiang's government would fall to the communist forces of Mao Zedong. When China fell to the communists in 1949, shocked Americans looked for scapegoats to blame for the debacle. Individuals such as Lattimore, who had been unremitting in their criticism of Chiang's regime, were easy targets.
McCarthy charges that Owen Lattimore is a Soviet spy ? History.com This Day in History ? 3/26/1950


3. "Mr. Truman said that the nationalists should have surrendered because they didn't have a chance to win...the opinion of American ambassador Leighton Stuart was that the failure of American aid to come at the opportune moment was the real cause of the weakness of nationalists and the disintegration of their armies....many military commanders went over to the enemy because they saw the United States withdrawing moral support from Chiang Kai-shek. Mr. Truman boldly defends what Treasury did. He doesn't mention Harry Dexter White, mentioned in congressional hearings as a communist spy, sat at Treasury with full power to say when the money promised Chiang Kai-shek would be forwarded or withheld." Toledo Blade, Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search



I can provide far more detail if necessary.

 

[Dot Com]

its just like Sobchak said: "The man in the black pajamas, Dude. Worthy fucking adversary."

Seriously though, there was no way the U.S. was going to kill their way to victory. Same w/ the present day Taliban. Theres was/is too many of them.

Are you claiming that the Vietnam war was winnable PoliChic? You know how many tons of bombs & agent orange were dropped on that country and they STILL won.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_tons_of_bomb_were_dropped_in_Vietnam_War

Over 7 million tons of bombs were dropped by the US during the Vietnam War; over 2 million tons were dropped during WW2.

 

[PoliticalChic]

its just like Sobchak said: "The man in the black pajamas, Dude. Worthy fucking adversary."

Seriously though, there was no way the U.S. was going to kill their way to victory. Same w/ the present day Taliban. Theres was/is too many of them.

Are you claiming that the vietnam war was winnable PoliChic? You know how many tons of bombs & agent orange were dropped on that country and they STILL won.

"Are you claiming that the vietnam war was winnable PoliChic"

What is the basis of your query?



If the OP was too difficult for you to understand, just say so.

I constructed it to show that Democrats prevented the US from keeping its commitment to folks who supported us.

This was in the center of the OP:
" One marvels at the lack of concern by the Left after the success of their machinations."

 

[9thIDdoc]

Damn....I remember that one well.

So do I became I lost more friends at close to exactly the same time in Cambodia and in both cases it was communist assholes ultimately responsible for the deaths.

Communist's were responsible for Kent State? I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!

Simple. It was the "protesters"-led by communists and communist sympathizers- who started and escalated the violence at Kent State and this time they got the violent response they wanted and martyrs to the cause.

 

[Dot Com]

its just like Sobchak said: "The man in the black pajamas, Dude. Worthy fucking adversary."

Seriously though, there was no way the U.S. was going to kill their way to victory. Same w/ the present day Taliban. Theres was/is too many of them.

Are you claiming that the vietnam war was winnable PoliChic? You know how many tons of bombs & agent orange were dropped on that country and they STILL won.

"Are you claiming that the vietnam war was winnable PoliChic"

What is the basis of your query?



If the OP was too difficult for you to understand, just say so.

I constructed it to show that Democrats prevented the US from keeping its commitment to folks who supported us.

This was in the center of the OP:
" One marvels at the lack of concern by the Left after the success of their machinations."

any additional funds, in addition to the lion's share that had already allocated, would'nt have made a dimes worth of difference to the outcome because it would've been to little, too late.

You get the gist of McNamara's book on the subject? He was the SECDEF and he said he knew the war was lost years before it was "officially" ended. If he knew, others in the Cabinet knew as well. Besides the West's supply lines were waaay long (which suited def contractors just fine because it added to the $ flowing into the def industrial complex) BUT favored the N Vietnamese because they were resupplied locally at a fraction of the time & cost.

 

[NoNukes]

1. Let's note in passing that you have not one gripe with the construction of the OP....because not only is every item correct...but the conclusion is indisputable.

So....what remains for you?
Yup.....try to change the subject.


2. Now...that particular subject....a terrific fall-back for a Leftist, 'cause you have been trained to respond to the phrase 'Kent State' similarly to the efforts of Pavlov, with



And this is largely because you don't know what you think you know....I'm reminded of the saying about how mushrooms are raised.


3. The folks who control the information that leads you down the primrose path, are the same ones who brought you the upheavals of the 60's.

Instructive of the movement is the new evidence released by the FBI as to the causes of the Kent State shootings of 1970.
“Previously undisclosed FBI documents suggest that the Kent State antiwar protests were more meticulously planned than originally thought and that one or more gunshots may have been fired at embattled Ohio National Guardsmen before their killings of four students and woundings of at least nine others on that searing day in May 1970….

Yet the declassified FBI files show the FBI already had developed credible evidence suggesting that there was indeed a sniper and that one or more shots may have been fired at the guardsmen first….And a memorandum sent to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover on May 19, 1970, referred to bullet holes found in a tree and a statue — evidence, the report stated, that “indicated that at least two shots had been fired at the National Guard.”
New light shed on Kent State killings - Washington Times


4. For perspective, consider the famous Weathermen ‘Days of Rage’ protests of the Chicago 7 trial in October 1969. Planned as war in the streets, even the Black Panthers decided that these folks were too psychotic even for them. Fred Hampton, deputy chairman of the Illinois chapter of the Black Panther Party (BPP), said “We oppose the anarchistic, adventuristic, chauvinistic, individualistic, masochistic, Custeristic Weathermen.”
Susan Braudy, “Family Circle: The Boudins and the Aristocracy of the Left,: p. 188

a. Too nuts for the Black Panthers, but they became respected advisors and co-authors to the current Democratic President.



b. At a 1969 “War Council” in Flint, Michigan, Bernardine Dohrn gave her most memorable and notorious speech to her followers. Holding her fingers in what became the Weatherman “fork salute,” she said of the bloody murders recently committed by the Manson Family in which the pregnant actress Sharon Tate and a Folgers Coffee heiress and several other inhabitants of a Benedict Canyon mansion were brutally stabbed to death: “Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!” Bernardine Dohrn - Discover the Networks


5. So...these are the folks that serve as teachers to you Leftists?
At other rallies, Dohrn said, "Bring the revolution home, kill your parents -- that's where it's at."


How very easy it is to lead the uninformed.

You're the truly uninformed. The whole reason why there was a war in Viet Nam is because we failed to allow democracy to take its course. We backed a minority regime that refused to allow a plebiscite on reunification and the rest, as they say, is history.

The reference to 'uninformed' was of your changing of the subject to Kent State.

But, you know that....don't you.

If the National Guard had been fired upon as the FBI states....that changes things, doesn't it?
And, since you were unaware of same, that pretty much proves who was uninformed.

One or more gunshots MAY have been fired? Sounds like a coverup. I knew people who were there. One guy was a Vietnam vet who was a Hawk until this incident. No one heard any gunshots, you have to do better than this.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Vietnam belonged to the Vietnamese. We did not belong there. We stayed too long. Most all of the heroic sacrifices were for nothing.

South Vietnam belonged to the South Vietnamese. The North Vietnamese had no more right to it than anyone else.

The US congress was responsible for making sure that RSVN and US military sacrifices were ineffective. We abandoned an ally in it's time of need and proved that we could not be trusted to honor our commitments, Certainly a cause for shame.

What a moron you are. But hey, you are consistent

 

[NoNukes]

So do I became I lost more friends at close to exactly the same time in Cambodia and in both cases it was communist assholes ultimately responsible for the deaths.

Communist's were responsible for Kent State? I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!

"... I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!"

Well...glad you're open to education.

The radicals in charge of groups such as the Weather Underground were communists, and planned to turn parts of the nation to China, Cuba, the Soviets....

...and open gulags,....

...and slay 25 million Americans.


Take notes:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlN2t0oERHk]Larry Grathwohl interview about William Ayers,Obama's Mentor - YouTube[/ame]

I was a leader in the anti war movement, and WE had no such intentions.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

http://mises.org/journals/lar/pdfs/3_2/3_2_5.pdf

VIETNAM And The Republicans
The War In Vietnam.

The Text of the Controversial Republican White Paper

Prepared by the Staff of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, Washington, .D. C.,

Public Affairs Press. 1967,

OOOOO! Good find!

yeah, I thought so. Facts and history go against most right wing arguments. It is why they must live in their little bubble.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

So do I became I lost more friends at close to exactly the same time in Cambodia and in both cases it was communist assholes ultimately responsible for the deaths.

Communist's were responsible for Kent State? I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!

"... I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!"

Well...glad you're open to education.

The radicals in charge of groups such as the Weather Underground were communists, and planned to turn parts of the nation to China, Cuba, the Soviets....

...and open gulags,....

...and slay 25 million Americans.


Take notes:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlN2t0oERHk]Larry Grathwohl interview about William Ayers,Obama's Mentor - YouTube[/ame]

What was the membership of that Underground?
JEsus, right world is whacky

 

[editec]

We gained precisely nothing by fighting there and the effects of it are still being felt today.

But, who could have known that then?

How about all those people that were protesting the war. I believe they had a clue.

I doubt most of them did. Protesting was a social event and a good way to get laid for the majority.

Give it just a moment's thinking and you'd realize how utter silly that statement is.

Remember the DRAFT?

People were paying attention to VietNam because about half of us were worried about getting out asses sent there or aready had friends and relatives who were in county.

Remember that at one point we have over one half million troops stationed there.

People, especdially those protesting that war knew far more about that nation and its history than most of CONGRESS apparently did.

 

[NoNukes]

its just like Sobchak said: "The man in the black pajamas, Dude. Worthy fucking adversary."

Seriously though, there was no way the U.S. was going to kill their way to victory. Same w/ the present day Taliban. Theres was/is too many of them.

Are you claiming that the vietnam war was winnable PoliChic? You know how many tons of bombs & agent orange were dropped on that country and they STILL won.

"Are you claiming that the vietnam war was winnable PoliChic"

What is the basis of your query?



If the OP was too difficult for you to understand, just say so.

I constructed it to show that Democrats prevented the US from keeping its commitment to folks who supported us.

This was in the center of the OP:
" One marvels at the lack of concern by the Left after the success of their machinations."

The folks who 'supported us' were a corrupt government fighting to hold onto the drug trade in the Golden Triangle.

 

[NoNukes]

So do I became I lost more friends at close to exactly the same time in Cambodia and in both cases it was communist assholes ultimately responsible for the deaths.

Communist's were responsible for Kent State? I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!

Simple. It was the "protesters"-led by communists and communist sympathizers- who started and escalated the violence at Kent State and this time they got the violent response they wanted and martyrs to the cause.

Total bullshit from someone who was not there and not involved.

 

[NoNukes]

Communist's were responsible for Kent State? I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!

"... I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation of THAT!"

Well...glad you're open to education.

The radicals in charge of groups such as the Weather Underground were communists, and planned to turn parts of the nation to China, Cuba, the Soviets....

...and open gulags,....

...and slay 25 million Americans.


Take notes:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlN2t0oERHk]Larry Grathwohl interview about William Ayers,Obama's Mentor - YouTube[/ame]

What was the membership of that Underground?
JEsus, right world is whacky

Most of us in the anti war movement were against the Weathermen and any form of violent protest. I was almost blown up trying to talk reason with a guy who was making a bomb. It went off as I was leaving the apartment.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Conservatives and Republicans have been playing games and shifting blame for Vietnam since teh 1950s:

The Republican study emphasizes that the Geneva Agree-
ment did not make the 17th parallel a permanent boundary
and that elections were required in two years. However.
the Republicans attempt to limit the responsibility of the
Dulles policy for undermining the Geneva Agreement by
placing the blame on Diem. Diem's actions inVietnam were
a phase of U. S. policy in Asia set by Dulles by creating
SEAT0 in September ,1954, less than two months after the
Geneva conference, and by the U. S. letter to Diem of
October 23. 1954 which had been dictated by a Thai repre-
senative. By concentrating upon Diem's actions, however.
the Republicans come to present an accurate description
of the devglopment of the National Liberation Frontof South
Vietnam. The study notes that the guerrilla activity began
in 1957 as a result of Diem's refusal to bold the 1956
elections provided for at Geneva. This opposition was in-
tensified when Diem replaced the local village chiefs
with Saigon appointees who naturally became the objects of
local "terrorism," i,e., popular justice.

The Republican statement, in its attempts to shift blame
from bi-partisan US imperialism to the Democratic add
ministration elected in November, 1960, fails to note the
importance of that election for the Vietnamese. Diem was
so closely identified with the Republican administration
that its defeat by the Democrats led the anti-Diem opposi-
tion to revolt against Diem, on November 11.1960. The Ken-
nedy administration, however, was to support Diem as
strongly as the Eisenhower administration. Meanwhile.
as a result of the unsuccessful revolt of the Saigon military
and political leaders supported by the paratroop forces.
the only effective opposition to the US-puppet regime was
now the guerrilla forces, and "in December 1960, the
National Front for Liberation of South Vietnam (NLF)
was formed by militant South Vietnamese insurgents."

http://mises.org/journals/lar/pdfs/3_2/3_2_5.pdf