[sparkscoffee] Re: Viet Nam, success or failure?

  • From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Sblumen123@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
  • To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 03:08:37 -0400 (EDT)

JS & Lee
The two warriors that were there. Didn't know Walter Cronkite was a  
general? Why did President
Johnson announced so dramatically not to run for a 2nd term? Who ordered  
Napalm, Agent Orange 
and all that bomb tonnage to be dropped on a poor, former colonial,  
agricultural country? How much
lives and costly military equipment did we invest in a losing war? Why were 
 so many Americans
demonstrating against it including Mohamad Alli and Jane Fonda? PR is why  
we lost the war? Didn't
you read the lying news media? When you two all knowing vets are demonizing 
 no one else should disagree? In my humble opinion the two of you brain 
washed  re-writing history idiots are so full of it.
Think, think, think.
 
Comrade B
 
  
 
In a message dated 8/17/2014 10:31:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
schalestock@xxxxxxxx writes:

Stanley,
 
Your are so full of it. Where do you get off telling Lee and I who were  
actually in combat in Vietnam that  we don't know what we are talking  about. 
Not to mention your own contradictions. Even the NVA leadership  
acknowledged we were winning the military battles. It was the PR campaign  
after TET 
that defeated us when the bumbling old geezer Walter Cronkite  announced to 
the American people the war was lost.
 
Your problem  (aside from being uneducated  and closed minded)  is that you 
insist your prejudices are reality. I agree with Lee's analysis.  We should 
never have gotten involved there in the first place. But that's a  lot 
different than talking about what actually took place on the ground. And  it's 
sure as hell more on the mark than yours.
 
JS


---------- Original Message ----------
From: ""  <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender 
"Sblumen123@xxxxxxx" for  DMARC)
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Viet  Nam, success or failure?
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 22:06:27 -0400  (EDT)

Lee
Remember after the war some American Officer told a Viet Nam Officer that  
we really won the turning point
Tiet (don't recall the spelling) offensive and the reply was yes but it  is 
irrelevent. Sorry but I consider your
analysis as irrelevent. Don't be such a big shot strategist, no one of  
importance after all this time says
what you say. We tried like hell to win and then an honorable way out and  
we lost.
 
Comrade B
 
 
In a message dated 8/16/2014 9:20:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
pixiehat@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:

Stan,
Viet Nam didnt really defeat  anybody.  They persevered.  The war was too 
expensive for France  to continue and they didnt consider the possible prize
was worth the  expense.  There were a number of reasons we left (gave up).  
Our  generals and admirals were not given the tools they needed to 
prosecute  the "police action".  The rules of engagement were stacked 
against  "winning" from the get go.  I argue that we should not have  been
there in the first place.  It wasnt our war.  However, It  was a war we 
could have "won".  All those bombs/napalm/and agent  orange, were simply
put in the wrong place and not in enough  quantity.  Of course, had we put 
enough resources in that theater to  make a difference, China would
have probably mached us bullet for  bullet.  I doubt the Vietnamese would 
have survived the war.  I  was there.  I went to bed every night scared
shitless.  I'm  glad we pulled out and I'm glad I managed to survive.    
I'm  glad Vietnam survived and that the people are beginning to  prosper.
Hopefully they will eventually have the government that they  deserve.  
Those in power now will continue to do a fine job untill  their prosperity
and that of their constituency conflict.  I dont  see us "re-invading".  I 
do see them having another civil war or  coup.  It's a beautiful country and
seven million visitors  is  just a tip of the ice berg.

Lee


On 8/16/2014 2:17 PM,  (Redacted sender _Sblumen123@aol.com_ 
(mailto:Sblumen123@xxxxxxx)  for DMARC)  wrote:

My dear JS
Our house pseudo intellectual, using demonizing words out  of thin air 
against a small communist country who the world respects for  winning a war 
against a Capitalist France and USA throwing napalm, agent  orange and more 
bombs then dropped during all of WW11. (See last  paragraph below). Did a 
little 
birdie tell you or you were there or know  someone who was there or what? 
Did you read that close to 7 million  tourists visits Vietnam yearly? Did you 
read DR's Wikipedia and figure  from that, that Vietanm is led by corrupt, 
vicious,  deadly communist leaders who are not trying to build a better 
country  for their people and it's future but only to make themselves rich?  
Perhaps we should re-invade them and be welcomed as saviors this  time? Advice, 
don't demonize when you don't know. Think, think,  think.
 
Stanley
 
 
In a message dated 8/14/2014 11:47:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
_schalestock@juno.com_ (mailto:schalestock@xxxxxxxx)  writes:

Lee,
 
You really nailed it. I remember my dad (a ww2 vet) saying it was a  civil 
war right from the start. And of course, those of us that were  over there 
had no doubt about the corruption of the South Vietnam  government and the 
ARVN.
 
I recently watched an interesting documentary about LBJ with live  videos 
of him talking to McNamara. It appears that he saw his conundrum  as fearing 
the Chinese would come in if he turned us loose to go up  north on one hand 
and fearing he would be accused of " losing" Vietnam  if he did nothing.  
Naturally, the end result was was a micro  managed cluster fuck that ended in 
our defeat.    But it  does show the consequences of electing an uneducated, 
self serving  ignoramus who didn't even know about the thousand year old 
animosity  between Vietnam and China.  There is no doubt the Vietnamese would  
have fought the Chinese just as hard as they did us had China tried to  
come into the war.
 
And, as you point out, capitalism has no corner on corruption. The  
communist regime in Vietnam is not only corrupt, its vicious and deadly  to its 
own 
people. So it goes in Stan's communist Utopian fantasy  world.
 
JS


---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Lee, NI7I"  _<pixiehat@xxxxxxxxxxx>_ (mailto:pixiehat@xxxxxxxxxxx) 
To:  _sparkscoffee@freelists.org_ (mailto:sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) 
Subject:  [sparkscoffee] Re: Viet Nam, success or failure?
Date: Thu, 14 Aug  2014 08:29:55 -0700

Stan, you would have a good argument if you  didnt insist on inserting half 
truths (which are worse than lies).   The US wasnt trying to impose 
anything on viet nam.  
What they  were doing was interfering with a civil war.  There was already 
a  "capitalist democracy" in place in south viet nam.  With our  assistance 
it became more
corrupt than it was and, again with our  assistance, in failed.  Now they 
have a "capitalist democracy" of  their own making.  I dont think you could 
really call what
they  have in that country communism.  It's just adifferent sort of  
capitalism.  And, from what I understand, is no less corrupt than  our country.

Lee
NI7I


On 8/13/2014 7:16 PM,  (Redacted sender _Sblumen123@aol.com_ 
(mailto:Sblumen123@xxxxxxx)  for DMARC)  wrote:

RR and DR and JS and etc.
You say you have an open mind and you know of no socialist  country that 
has succeeded excluding China?
How about Viet Nam, isn't that a country run by communists? It  was a 
colony of Captalist France until
it won it's independence and then again when  Captalist America tried to 
impose a Captalist  Democracy on it and failed and it won the admiration of 
the world even  by many here? Today we free trade with it and it is even a  
tourist destination including soldiers who fought against them.  Remember the 
unkown Spanish author of the saying, 'A wise man changes  his mind often, a 
fool never'. You can call me the fool but  as wise men 
where do you stand?
 
Comrade B
 
   
 
 

____________________________________________________________
_Fast, Secure,  NetZero 4G Mobile Broadband. Try  it._ 
(http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT2) 







____________________________________________________________
_Apple's new  iPhone?
Look closely. Because as you  might guess, Apple is hiding something…
_ (http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/53f0bc84a4b893c840debst03vuc) 
_fool.com_ 
(http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/53f0bc84a4b893c840debst03vuc)

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. sparkscoffee
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2014