From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections,alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Stockdale is a Bumbling Idiot
Date: 10 Nov 92 17:15:07 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <JTURNER.92Nov7205744@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> jturner@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey Turner) writes:
]In article <1992Nov7.152731.15169@emr1.emr.ca> knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen) writes:
]
]> I think there is some misconception in history here. The war has
]> been escalated by the involvement of North Vietnam Army and comunist world.
]> After the attack of 36 SVN provincial capitals and 5 major cities
]> failed, National Liberation Army suffered heavy loss (33,000 killed) in
]> Tet Offensive 1968; the ranks of Viet Cong evaporated. As result,
]> "MOST OF INSURGENTS IN SOUTH VIETNAM WERE ACTUALLY NORTH VIETNAMESE
]> SOLDIERS".
]
]	Who or what are you quoting.

The reference is found in many books. Including, I think one written by
General Giap after the war. NVA troops were in the South mixed in with NLF
forces. It's in quite a few history books. Look it up. Or are you just going
to dismiss it as propaganda?

]
]> The Tet Offensive failed because there was no support from the populace
]> of South Vietnam; it meant that NLF burnt all their own men. Instead of
]> seeing things behind this event; peace activists told lie to the public
]> that it was an immoral war because it was a civil war. When being mentioned 
]> about this, the public started backing up; their conscience was not
]> behind a "immoral war".
]
]	There was no support from the populace of South Vietnam?
]C'mon, get of it.  John Stockwell, US CIA (retired) who was involved
]in covert operations there has testified otherwise.  If there was
]no popular support for the Viet Cong then what was the whole point
]of the strategic hamlets?  And why had the president of SV tried
]to negotiate a settlement 5 years earlier if it was simply a hostile
]invasion?

I believe that Kim is refering to one objective of the Tet Offensive. Part of
the plan was to incite a nationwide revolt amongst the populace of South
Vietnam to overthrow the government. It did not come out as planned, along 
with the plan to give the U.S. Army a crushing defeat like the French recieved
at Dien Bien Phu. The former of those two failed because the people of South
Vietnam, while they didn't like the RoV government, the North was not very 
popular either. The people mostly wanted to be left alone. The latter of those
two failed because NLF and NVA forces, by fighting an open battle, put 
themselves in a position where we could effectively use our airpower. Khe Sanh
was turned into a meat grinder for the NVA forces beseiging the Marines they
had surrounded.

The main reason for the strategic hamlets and other "brilliant" ideas was 
mostly because the war was run from Washington by people who had no clue
as to what they were doing or really wanted. Ask someone who flew during 
Rolling Thunder or other pre-Linebacker missions about how their targets
were selected. It's almost amusing, not. 

]
]	The US and the ARVN LOST THE WAR.  Get off trying to
]prove otherwise.

Won every battle but lost the war anyway. Funny, but true.

]
]				--Jeff Turner


-- 
Patrick Chester            |----------------------------------------------------
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu |"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep
Politically Incorrect      |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein
Future Lunar Colonist      |"The meek shall inherit the Earth. The rest of us
#^%$!! Militarist          |  are going to the stars." Anonymous
(Of the Sun Tzu mentality) |----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc