HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Proof Positive of GoodThink
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 18:51:46 GMT

kjetilgr@ifi.uio.no (Kjetil Granlien) writes:
] 
] Nobody can win a war.. you can't win anything by a war.. 
] 
] you can only lose a war.. 

Which explains why Bergenbelson, Dachau, 
Aushwitz closed their doors by mutual
consent of the Camp Administrators and
those persons who had relocated themselves
to the New Frontier.

ciao
drieux



-- 
Modern Day Problems

Does that 'answer' your question,
or should I be a little more vague.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: harthc@ntmtv.UUCP (Howard Hart)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:44:04 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.210635.7530@news2.cis.umn.edu>, charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep30.124440.28171@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu
|> (Mark McCullough) writes:
|> 
|> > The press was praised by the enemy for helping cause the US to fail to win
|> > the Vietnam war.  How can you justify this biased and non-factual reporting
|> > of the press?
|> 
|> Baloney.  The press had very little to do with the American people turning
|> against the war.  No more than the Soviet press had to do with the Russian
|> people turning against the war in Afganistan.  I think all those casualties
|> and nothing accomplished was the cause.
|> 

Salami. The press had everything to do with the American people turning
against the war. Do you really think enough people gave a shit about
a war fought 6000 miles away, in which we lost all of maybe 50,000 
servicemen over the entire 10+ years? Hell, we loose that many people 
on the freeways every YEAR (men, women and children, not soldiers) 
not including walking wounded and no one's screaming to outlaw cars. 
There had to be some other impetus and the press, for good or bad, 
was it.

As for the Soviet decision, people apply way too many "parallels"
between Vietnam and there. The only thing they really had in common
was a superpower got its nose bloodied in what originally looked
like a kick-some-ass Monday, clean-up Tuesday, head-for-home-Miller-
time Wednesday war. 

In the case of the Soviets, they were beaten by technology, (in the form
of Stinger missiles), and glasnost. 
In the case of the US, we lost because we weren't willing to bleed 
forever, and the press shoved the point home nightly in graphic detail.
 
If you still think they were similiar, ask yourself, how long did it
take North Vietnam to overun the South after the US left compared
to the same situation when the Soviets left Afghanistan. 


Howard Hart

DISCLAIMER: These opinions are not those of my company, Northern 
Telecom. I haven't got a clue what their opinions are.
From: yngla@ida.liu.se (Yngve Larsson)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Merits of the Free Press
Date: 5 Oct 92 10:23:50 GMT
Organization: CIS Dept, Univ of Linkoping, Sweden

One may have many opinions about the relative merits of a free press, and
in general I think the press is a slandering, opinionated hypocrite.

The press (reporters and editors) selects the message to be published, and 
they are very rarely have any knowledge about what they are printing. Thus,
the information becomes garbled, biased and incomplete.

On the sublect of the Vietnam War however, consider this:


	If there had been any resemblence of a free press in
	North Vietnam, there would not have been a Vietnam War.

Of cause, NV was/is a ultra-totalitarian state able to completetly control
the opinions of the people. They probably won because of this.

comments?

				Yngve Larsson

--
Yngve Larsson                               UUCP: ...mcvax!enea!liuida!yla
Dept of CIS                                       Internet: yla@ida.liu.se
Linkoping University, Sweden                          Phone: +46-13-281949
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: thorntn@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Duncan Peter G. Thornton)
Subject: Re: Lost the War?
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 07:02:51 GMT

In <1992Sep25.155955.3327@iplmail.orl.mmc.com> markb@iplmail.orl.mmc.com (Mark Bower) writes:

>Finally, I would like to respond to the lady from Norway who said "Nobody wins
>a war." Nations and people most certainly do win wars, and are certainly
>better off than the losers. Whatever enemies there are of Norway will be glad,
>however, to hear that you have already taken the first step for them in
>convincing yourself that you can never win. 

Just out of curiousity, what enemies might there be of Norway? Are
ravening Scotsmen even now sharpening their cabers and rehearsing
ancient grudges about the smelt catch? Are the Danes fingering the
edges of their Ry-krisps and muttering about issues thought settled in
Beowulf's Day? Are the Swedes re-commissioning members of the biathlon
team as they contemplate yet again reviving their expansionist dream
of a port on the commercially vital Arctic Ocean starting with a
blitzkrieg to secure Nordkapp and a monopoly on North Pole expedition
souvenir concessions?

The Boogy Pirates? 

The blue-penised men of the Orinico?


- Duncan

_____
Guns don't kill people, but
they sure help the body count.

Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@m.cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana,  IL
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:41:03 GMT

In article <1992Oct02.033053.100646@watson.ibm.com> gerth@watson.ibm.com
(John Gerth) writes:
>I can only say to the Vietnamese who've posted such compelling stories
>here -- we seduced and abandoned your freedom in the most inexplicable and
>shameful way
>-- 
>John Gerth	 gerth@watson.ibm.com		(914) 784-7639

Huh?  I have no idea of what you are referring to here.  Please explain
(even if the motives for the "seduction" are inexplicable :-) ).
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen)
Subject: Re: How could the United States have won?
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 03:23:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.003941.12887@m.cs.uiuc.edu> drk@m.cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:
>In article <5951@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>, mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
>(Markus Stumptner) writes:
>>I also think that their move into Cambodia was mainly motivated by power
>>politics
>>-- 
>>Markus Stumptner                               mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
>
>Hadn't the Khmer Rouge also been attacking Vietnamese villages across the
>border for an extended period of time?

-------
My posting has nothing to do with the original one, but it does with the second
one.
About Khmer Rouge attacking along the border, I have got a bad experience.      Around 1978-79, I work as laborer in a communist geological team whose base     is located in a mall town called Kien-luong. Kien-luong, Ha-tien, Kampotville
share one shoreline of the Gulf of Thailand. Kien-luong is where ciment Portland(also called ciment Ha-tien, anybody once served in the 4th Corps would kow Ha-
tien) is produced for the whole South Vietnam. The border between VN and
Kampuchia is not far away. Khmer Rouge attacks villages close to the border, butnever goes deeply beyond the line. One early mornig, sounds of guns mingled withscreams and yellings so close that I and people in the team just have enough
time to get few belongings and run out of town. I don't have guns to protect
myself; only communist people in the team have arms. While running in panic, I
can see Khmer Rouge men and women with black uniform try to swim across the
river which is at the west side of Kien-luong. Only two or three can make it andare killed by an communist army unit. I never forget those yelling while
advancing of Khmer Rouge thugs.
After the mess, I came back to town which is damaged a bit, but a village       between Kien-luong and the border is wiped out totally : 500 villagers have
gone; pregnant women having no more baby; kids being torn in halves; men being
beheaded;.....These descriptions are not fictitious or imitate movies
Experiencing this makes me know what a so-called swift revolution is. Khmer
Rouge chooses the method as the first step of four steps towards true
communism. They kill their own people in the same way they did to unlucky
villagers mentioned above : by hand, machete, shovel.
That is why so many people have to escape by all means because of the way
they cleanse this society,        
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer 865-8497)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Originator: whitmeye@surf
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 04:19:29 GMT


In article <1992Oct1.234404.7583@ntmtv>, harthc@ntmtv.UUCP (Howard Hart) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep30.210635.7530@news2.cis.umn.edu>, charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer) writes:
|> |> In article <1992Sep30.124440.28171@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu
|> |> (Mark McCullough) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> > The press was praised by the enemy for helping cause the US to fail to win
|> |> > the Vietnam war.  How can you justify this biased and non-factualreporting
|> |> > of the press?
|> |> 
|> |> Baloney.  The press had very little to do with the American people turning
|> |> against the war.  No more than the Soviet press had to do with the Russian
|> |> people turning against the war in Afganistan.  I think all those casualties
|> |> and nothing accomplished was the cause.
|> |> 
|> 
|> Salami. The press had everything to do with the American people... 
|> In the case of the Soviets, they were beaten by technology, (in the form
|> of Stinger missiles), and glasnost. 
|> In the case of the US, we lost because we weren't willing to bleed 
|> forever, and the press shoved the point home nightly in graphic detail.
|>  
|> If you still think they were similiar, ask yourself, how long did it
|> take North Vietnam to overun the South after the US left compared
|> to the same situation when the Soviets left Afghanistan. 
|> 
|> 
|> Howard Hart
|> 

Tofu cakes! I do agree with Howard. But I'd like add some of my thoughts.
The Peoples anti-aircraft batteries (or whatever they were called) shot
down a lot of B-52's. Bamboo and mud can't do that. The NV had their own
technology and used it. The U.S. press provided the same function as glasnost.
It just wasn't a new idea to the U.S.. _Information to form opinions with._
Since the treaty ending our envolvement was 1973 and Siagon was taken in
late 1975, lets say 18 months to overun. How long has the Red Army been back
home? Two years? I'd say some of the similarities have yet to develope.

Rich Whitmeyer          Views expressed are solely my own.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Originator: whitmeye@surf
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 05:33:41 GMT


In article <1992Sep26.095620.27928@doug.cae.wisc.edu>, mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep25.034214.11052@coe.montana.edu> sandy@cs.montana.edu (Colin "Sandy" Pittendrigh) writes:
|> >In article <24SEP199201043297@summa.tamu.edu> rtb3270@summa.tamu.edu writes:
|> >>     I am taking a Vietnam political ...
|> >
|> >	Well I'll try to be polite. But your professor sounds like a
|> >quite the fool. Didn't we ...
|> 
|> Sounds to me like you haven't looked at what caused the US to have problems.
|> It directly links in to why we had so easy a time with Iraq.  No, I am not
|> talking about a military reason, anyone who bothers to check their facts
|> realizes that the US did not lose any major battle in all of vietnam.

You are correct about that, but fact is we lost an unjust war.
  
|> What I am talking about is the %(##!&^ Press.

You have any idea of the value of a free %<##!&^ Press?

|> How many times in Vietnam did the press come in and accompany soldiers on |>_patrol_!

Not enough times. If I'm to support something as important as that I want and deserve all the information that can be provided.

|> Look at how the Tet offensive was reported.  Tet, a major victory for the US, |> was reported as a crippling defeat by one certain reporter whose name I need
|> not mention.

I call the loss of a provincial capital defeat. That we destroyed it to get it back is another. (Hue)

|> We were dealing with a fanatical enemy.  In order to defeat such an enemy,
|> you must break their fanaticism.  This was never done.

They were not fanatics. They were painfully aware of the power we possessed and realized that if they died trying to kick us out, it was a better death than the one to be had as a helpless victim. That is real commitment, not lip service. To the Vietnamese we must have seemed like the fanatics.

|> All they had to do was selectively fire their cameras.

That reminds me of the Desert Storm photo analyst who said that the graphic footage from gun cameras should never be declassified, `cause, if the people saw the realities of carnage they'd never support it again. I want the whole fraud exposed.

|> The US could not have occupied North Vietnam until we broke their spirit. This |> is what has been done in all the successful occupations of modern history.

What successful occupations? Poland? Germany? Afghanistan? India? Namimbia? France? Manchuria? Palestine? I know, Ohio! Now that one was successful.

|> 
|> 
|> 					Mark


Face it, when one nation sends troops to force anything down the throats of another nation the defenders have the edge. They can't wish they could just go home. They are in it for the duration, and they are on favorable terrain. They can't quit. Each time you kill one, you make more.
The press is not reason the US pulled out, we as a nation could no longer live a lie in the face of over whelming facts. TO OUR CREDIT, TOO!

  Lucky Rich Whitmeyer                DRAFT-LOTO # 269  1971
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Elections
From: smittie@beach.csulb.edu (Smittie)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 20:19:58 GMT
Organization: Cal State Long Beach

Ho chi ming carried the popular vote in, I believe, two "elections" both of
which were declared invalid by whoever was holding the South's strings. Ho chi
ming's Nationalist movement was very popular. The US was well aware of this but
didn't want to admit it. After all, Ho Chi Ming was espousing that awful Commie
rhetoric. No one in power wanted to listen to the Vietnam-hands in State Dept.
But that is hardly any big surprise. No one listened to the China-hands 50
years prior either.

American involvement in Vietnam was, in my opinion, the result of bad policy
taken to it extreme. We sent Generals to China to support the corrupt, but
Western-like Chaing Kai largely because we didn't want Mao and his commies to
gain power. We "lost" in China by our own admission. We went a step further and
sent troops to Korea again to stop this terrible evil called communism. Korea
was a draw. We sent troops to Vietnam to stop this terrible evil called
communism. Again, we lost. Ten years later we are beginning to see that left to
its own devices communism, at least in its current form, will collapse of its
own accord.

Maybe we should have respected the desires of the people of China, Vietnam, and the
Phillipines. Had we not made such an issue of communism we would have had more
effective influence with popular governments. We could have used this influence
to insure the human rights of those people who elected their chosen governments
much more effectively. Instead we sent troops to bomb their land, kill their
people (our own getting killed in that same process), and really contribute
little to their overall welfare.

American foreign policy as regards Asia was and is a travesty.

smittie

--
___________________________________________________________________________
GEnie, MCI, AOL:Smittie   All of these accounts except MCI will die on or
smittie@beach.csulb.edu   about Dec 31. UNIX will be forwarded for 2 weeks.
___________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Subject: Re: Domino Effect (was Re: Did We Lose?)
Reply-To: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: all
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:31:09 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.175539.8155@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, drk@m.cs.uiuc.edu
(David Kohr) writes:
|> 
|> In any case, my point is that the original US objective of avoiding
the
|> Domino Effect was largely successful in the sense that the
governments of
|> the large majority of the countries which mattered the most
economically to
|> the US and its allies in Southeast Asia (such as Thailand,
Singapore,
|> Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia) did not fall to popular
(read
|> "Communist")  insurgencies (despite the presence of insurgencies in
many of
|> them at the time).

	This rather reminds me of the joke in which a man is standing
on a streetcorner in Boston, snapping his fingers.  When asked why he
is doing this, he replies that he is keeping elephants away.  When told
that there are no elephants in Boston, he replies "See what a great
job I'm doing ?".

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 John Carr                           UNIX Support Specialist
 jbc4m@virginia.edu                  Academic Computing, Gilmer Hall
 804/982-4710                        University of Virginia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Subject: Re: Vietnam Oral History and Folklore Project
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 13:17:30 GMT

In article <92272.022231MSH109@psuvm.psu.edu> <MSH109@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>Sunday's horoscope...
>What sign was it listed under?
>--Mike

Beats me!  I got it from "Pearl Harbor:December 7, 1941 - December 7, 1991"
LIFE Collector's Edition, Fall 1991, pp 18.

Anyone got access to microfilm archives of "The Los Angeles Evening Herald
Express"?

Larry J

-- 
#L.W. Jewell Moderator at the Veterans Information Site (veteran@cc.purdue.edu)#
#& WWII-L Listowner: "Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange,#
#sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all   #
#phases of life." "Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41  #
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@melodian.cs.uiuc.edu (Dave Kohr)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Organization: CS Dept., Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 08:56:21 GMT

Throughout this entire thread, I don't think I've seen mention of the
original official reason for US intervention in Indochina: the so-called
"Domino Effect".  I think any complete appraisal of whether or not the US
"lost" the war in Vietnam must consider this original objective.
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Xref: sparky alt.war.vietnam:95 soc.veterans:1074
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,soc.veterans
Subject: Vietnam War literature collection.
Date: 28 Sep 92 23:18:49 GMT
Followup-To: alt.war.vietnam
Organization: Purdue University


This was passed to me by a friend:   
................................................................................
Thought you might want to pass this tidbit on:  
Colorado State University holds the largest collection of Vietnam War 
literature in existence.  The special collection includes fiction and 
non-fiction, as well as personal literature---a set of tapes from an airman to
his family, for example, and letters.  If I remember rightly, John Newman is 
the archivist, and can be reached by mail at Morgan Libraries, CSU, Ft. 
Collins, CO  80523 or by e-mail at [jnewman@vines.colostate.edu]. The 
collection continues to grow, much of it through donations from Vietnam Vets. 
Colorado State University is the home of Dr. Michael Charney (not U of CO, as 
was reported in a recent article), who has dealt forensically with returned 
remains.  Also on our faculty, in English, is John Clark Pratt, with 
Laotian_Fragments and another book of the era and experience to his credit.
................................................................................
Larry Jewell
-- 
#L.W. Jewell Moderator at the Veterans Information Site (veteran@cc.purdue.edu)#
#& WWII-L Listowner: "Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange,#
#sudden and wholly unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all   #
#phases of life." "Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41  #
From: drk@m.cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: What Did We Lose?
Date: 28 Sep 92 00:49:28 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana,  IL

In article <l0gz#7j@rpi.edu> whangj@aix.rpi.edu (Junho Whang) writes:
>   One continuing problem in S. Vietnam was vietcongs, majority of 
>whom were south vietnamese, and received active support from 
>populace.  Now how can you save a country if you have to shoot 
>everyone in it to save it?  When americans went into Vietnam, they 
>were essentially filling a vacuum - becoming the government, 
>soldiers, and the only supporting framework of the country.  S. 
>Vietnam was in a continual state of decline, without a stable and 
>viable government, populace dispirited by with 20 years of continuing war.
>Departure of americans in 1973 left just a husk of a country, 
>which collapsed more from internal implosion rather than invasion 
>of NVA.  The successful invasion was more of symptom than cause of 
>demise of S. Vietnam.
>  In end, despite similarity, Korean war and Vietnam was two
>entirely different class of engagment.  Former a deflection of 
>massive external agression to otherwise fully viable country, and 
>latter, an attempt at prolonged intensive resusitation of dying 
>fragments of a country.

I agree whole-heartedly with this assessment.  Why is it that people in the
US have such a hard time recognizing that the US was intervening primarily
in favor of the losing side (a side largely of US creation) in a civil war?
-- 
Dave Kohr     CS Graduate Student     Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Work: 3244 DCL, (217)333-6561  Home: (217)359-9350  E-mail: drk@cs.uiuc.edu
                   "One either has none or not enough."
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam