From: knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen)
Subject: Re: Stockdale is a Bumbling Idiot
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:27:23 GMT

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.
>
---------

I missed your posting on my Unix. As I remember you claimed it was US did
make war continue, but you had not a look on the other side and found why
the war has grown from a guerilla to strategic warfare. If you
did go through previous postings which showed why the war escalated, I just
continue to show why SLF couldn't do the job and why NVN had to jump in. From
this reasoning you see that the war is not civil at all because NVN moved
most of regular army to invade SVN. This was exactly what North Korea 
invaded South Korea. As result, US must come to rescue in order to protect
the whole Southeast Asia. Domino docrine was the core of all involvement in
that area. NO SMOKE, NO FIRE.

In one of your posting, you exaggerated the number 3 million dead but the 
account I put in separate just quoting you to read the exact number. My
intention in giving number of communist dead to imply that SLF had not enough 
fighters (no replenishing members from the populace) and NVN did join that
account.

One more thing is one poster showed that you did not read carefully VN 
history during that time.

--------


>> 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?
>
-------


If there were accurate reports US did win the war. I read but I am
skeptical; the reason is I have to put counteracted questions,
make my own judgement and defend it as much as you could.

Now I tell why US has failed to look at the problems of STRATIGIC HAMLETS.

-One of the reasons US and abroad, especially in US at that time thought
that Diem had to set up those hamlets because Ngo was afraid of support
of the populace to VC ? This has been echoed to me when I was there. Look
at reality of the time when guerilla war still existed; with this I want
to mention to you that after 1968, NVN decided to fight with well-armed
units from battalions up to divisions. This means that invasion were truly
applied.

-One of US servicemen has gone on television and said that it was hard to
fight in VN because there is no difference between SVN, VC and North
Vietnamese. Infiltrated VC and NVN used camouflage as ordinary civilians;
they can infiltrate groups of three in any village and terrorize villagers.
They press them to gather all crop to bring to their bases, stock them
and fed themselves. In any battle, they press women, old people and kids
to the front so that SVN and US armies couldn't eliminate them. When VC
are chased away, villagers go back to normal life. At night, these guys
come back and push villagers to self-critisize. If they resist, they open
justice court and condemn these to death; their corpses with hands tied to
the back are often left on roadside to warn any discontent. To press 
villagers to continue feed them, they usually kidnap villagers' relative.
My cousin have been take away when he was 12 years old. Look to the
South of your country to see how Shining Path acts towards Peruvian 
villagers in any intrusion.

-What Ngo wanted was to isolate VC terrorists and thieves. He wanted to
destroy VC not villagers who got involved unvoluntarily. To isolate VC is
to protect villagers and let those VC die of starvation. The war can't
last forever which VC and NVN applied exactly Mao strategy "ENDURING
RESISTANCE". There are only two things here : VC and free South Vietnamese.
If Ngo had big army to protect villagers, there would be not STRATIGIC 
HAMLETS".

These hamlets did avoid killing of wrong guys which were our fellows 
without arms to protect themselves. STRATEGIC HAMLETS did reduce 
assassinations and VC coulddo anything to advance. Diem did explain to
US friends that this war is not like in South Korea which is surrounded
by sea, except DMZ; communists couldn't infiltrate among the populace
so that North Korea had no choice to attack with strategic army.

Now, go back to Vietnam. The war during Diem died out when VC had few
rice to stock. They could order any people to labor for them and
people in the countryside just enjoy their peaceful life in prosperity.

VC and NVN could not stand this because as long as the populace are
not hungry and suffered what they based on to tell people to uprise.
Uprising for what ? Communists must base on suffering and hard economy to 
flourish. I am a testimony for that and don't base on any book to utter
what I did not see. Ask you Vietnamese friend, they would tell you that
the period from 1954-1963 was the most prosperous and happy time without
war.

VC and NVN had to bring hamlets down so that they can hide behind innocent
people to fight. The much they failed a battle the much the shield was
shattered. Ngo-dinh-Diem knew that crafty intention and tried to convince
US not tofall into trap. But, alas, reports and reports from US experts and
from US public woed by "some naive experts"did not agree and looked down
on Diem.

-Diem died along with his HAMLETS. After 1963, VC came back their own
strategy and made SVN and US armies into dilemma because they did like
to kill villagers whom they want to protect.

-My-lai incident was among untold incidents where VC did use people as 
shield. US and SVN fell from one trap to another trap which were related
to this issue. 

-On psychological war front, VC and communists did use these effects to
stimulate conscience of the world. The world thought that Diem had tried
to cut off the support, but they did know that that method could make
war shorter,

-Now you know why I did not believe in Stockwell report. I did make a long
account about STRATEGIC HAMLET", now I have right your honest answer.
DO YOU THINK VC AND NVN LOVE THEIR POPULACE AND MAKE THEM HAPPY ?

-About Diem's intention to negotiate, read few previous threats
where I reasoned there were no chance for that. If you couldn't I will 
post. Remember to go back and read them; if not you are out of date.

----------

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

Gee ! Look beyond the border to Soviets and East Eurpe bloc. My intention
here is clear, I would like to show why US and SVN lost the war and point
out culprits and misconception so that few US people can understand and
reconciliate. Communism is dead while you are still a day dreamer.

I did live in dream to deny history ? But I tell you that I dream to
see Communist Vietnam die. 


By the way, here is what I like to answer what you put in another posting :



Yours :


     Fortunately for the large number of Vietnamese who opposed
the US neo-colonialism.  The US has no right to run the world, and
the Vietnamese certainly showed that.

---------

Mine :

Wow ! With the same bold assertion and the same rhetoric ! Neo-colonialism
was once uttered from Sovietic communists who were dead two years ago. 
These are now words only for one who are dying. Get it.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc