HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Subject: Re: Is communism immoral? (was Re: Did We Lose?)
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:29:14 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.053919.3288@den.mmc.com> whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer 865-8497) writes:
|
|In article <Bvttnz.IoE@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell) writes:
||> In article <1992Oct8.172936.16740@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
||> >Uh, quick note, communism is an economic system (as oppossed to capitalism)
||> >and is not necessarily a form of government.  
||> 
||>  [Since this has wandered completely away from the charter, I'll keep
||> this short.]
||>  Communism is to Government (note the capital G) what atheism is to Relgion,
||> namely, a variation on the theme.
||>  Communism's aim was the destruction of Government (the famous "withering
||> away of the State".)
||>  Until this happened, the powers of the State had to be assumed by the
||> Party, as trustee for the people, and viola! a new government.
||> 
||> Larry J
||> -- 
|
|That was good, but somwhere in there should be the part about the workers
|owning the means of production. Is that not the principle differnce between
|Communism and Socialism?

  Ok, Socialist=Agnostic, Communist=Atheist.

|>
|>Rich Whitmeyer            Views expressed are solely my own.

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: knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen)
Subject: Re: Reasons We should Have Kept Vietnam
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:03:04 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.164613.18074@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.055459.4075@den.mmc.com>, whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer) writes:
>> 
>> In article <1992Oct10.203509.6375@wetware.com>, drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>> 
>> Serious question here.  
>> 
>> Just what were the French after?
>> My guess is we wanted access to the mysterious wealth too.
>> 
>> Rich Whitmeyer                The lesser of two evils, is still evil.
>
>I think the french were just tring to hold onto what they had left of their
>empire.  A question of a similar nature, what did Britian fight over the
>Faulklands for?  I've never heard of anything they produce that is really
>irreplaceable.
>
>Larry Billings
>

------------------
 
Sorry for few misplaced words. I post it again.

France, Great Britain, Portugal,...as colonists they excavate everything and
bring back to their country to support for their developing economy. As result,
with that big task, they have to exploit manpower too. To keep unjustice
floating, they don't use too much their regular army, but instead mercenaries
who are foreigners, criminals or opportunists. Violence, brutality,barbarity
having been committed by these bastards cretate deep and numerous sufferings
to our people. If colonists lose the war, they feel bad because they lost
huge resources. You never see or hear any evidence about they or their
public reflect their concern about our suffering.

Differently, except about armaments produced at home to create jobs for American
I don't thing US can get much from VN. The oil exploration through UN aid
has proved to be non-economical; rubber (as suggested by one poster) may be.
But these are not enough interesting motives for US who did spend much more
money than that, youngster's lives to exchange such thing. Right ?

The only practical reason US tries to keep VN is just to block the spread of
communism (Domino theory) far to the south; this, in turn, will threat the
stability of the South Pacific Area, Indochina, Thailand, Malaysia. North
Vietnam will swallow South Vietnam and Laos; China will control Cambodia.
Thailand would be next. US always would like to keep South Pacific safe and
in their control. To keep it as goal, US did do what they can do while the
cold war is very obviou.

So, I think you don't need to have any doubt about your country's mission 
anymore and put aside unreasonable critics.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Is communism immoral? (was Re: Did We Lose?)
From: smittie@beach.csulb.edu (Smittie)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 18:32:45 GMT
 <1992Sep30.124440.28171@doug.cae.wisc.edu><5373@gold.gvg.tek.com><PD.92Oct6023
 521@horus.sics.se><SMITTIE.92Oct6125519@tui.csulb.edu><PD.92Oct7040559@horus.sics.se>
Organization: Cal State Long Beach

>Oh, yes there is. There are good forms of government and there are
>bad. Communism isn't "simply a form of government". It is a bad (or
>evil if you like) form of government. Claiming communism is "just a
>form of government" is just as naive as saying the same thing about
>nazism.

In what I have read of Mao and Ho Chi Min, I have seen nothing in their
interpretations of Lenin-Marxist theory that supports this. However, I may well
be naive as you imply.

>To set up a communist government you have to abandon human rights.

Again, I don't see this as inherently true. Repeatedly the practice, yes.

I still think that if, in a free election, the populace of any country chooses
a Communist form of government it is not the United States' place to deny them
their own wishes. I opened the can about Communism good or evil but I now
realize that even if we determine Communism to be inherently evil and I am not
at all sure that we then have the right to deny a  nation the option of
choosing that form of government.

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.
___________________________________________________________________________
From: whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer 865-8497)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Is communism immoral? (was Re: Did We Lose?)
Date: 13 Oct 92 05:39:19 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver
Originator: whitmeye@surf


In article <Bvttnz.IoE@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct8.172936.16740@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
|> >Uh, quick note, communism is an economic system (as oppossed to capitalism)
|> >and is not necessarily a form of government.  
|> 
|>  [Since this has wandered completely away from the charter, I'll keep
|> this short.]
|>  Communism is to Government (note the capital G) what atheism is to Relgion,
|> namely, a variation on the theme.
|>  Communism's aim was the destruction of Government (the famous "withering
|> away of the State".)
|>  Until this happened, the powers of the State had to be assumed by the
|> Party, as trustee for the people, and viola! a new government.
|> 
|> 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  

That was good, but somwhere in there should be the part about the workers
owning the means of production. Is that not the principle differnce between
Communism and Socialism?

Rich Whitmeyer            Views expressed are solely my own.
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Date: 11 Oct 92 17:34:11 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <92Oct10.200351edt.47892@neat.cs.toronto.edu> quoctp@cs.toronto.edu (Quoc Tuan Pham) writes:
>dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>
>>supporting nationalist causes.  Most of the politicians in the South
>>(at least the ones the US permitted to have power) were not involved
>>in fighting the French.  I think its reasonable for people to use that
>>as a big part of a litmus test for its leaders.  
>Do you know what happened to most of the anti-French nationalists?
>Hint: read my previous post.



I have never read that this happened, but assuming you are correct, it
is a good reason _not_ to support Ho, but not necessarily a good reason
to support Diem or Thieu (sp?).
-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen)
Subject: Re: About Castro and *Yankee, go home* from VN
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Distribution: world,local
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 02:19:11 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.182530.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.015941.12274@emr1.emr.ca>, knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen) writes:
>> Sorry for not a followw-up to the related subject. My phone has been cut
>> off by a coming phone call. Netter with related subject would know that
>> I woud like to debate about his suggestions.
>
>Thanks for replying.  P.S. Could you add more blank lines and more capital
>letters to your posts easier to read?
> 
>> - Why demolishing Castro ? We are trying to analyze the past in order to
>> learn lessons to win in the future with our just democracy.
>> Your Administration has exercised a new approach to win in Kuwait and got
>> reputation abroad. It did stick with UN resolution. Stick with the
>> international community to solve prolems globally.
>
>Clearly, Cuba is not important enough to commit troops to a la Vietnam
>or Desert Storm.  I don't even think we should adopt the strategy of
>trying to "win Cuba" over to democracy.  The best the U.S. can do is, as
>you hinted at, work more closely with the UN to promote free exchange of
>ideas and promoting democracy.  It's a more general strategy, and is more
>likely to achieve its aims in the NWO than massive shipments of troops
>around the globe.
>
>> - Cuba and VN or China sooner or later wil follow USSR's path. A huge Soviets
>> with colossal manpower and resources are candidate for a requirement to
>> create socalism and communism (any scholar knows about this). Its satellites,
>> economically speaking, could not afford for that goal and have to cling on
>> Soviets to survive. The cost of building communism are so severe that Soviets
>> can not stand it any longer. I don't mean about political view here.
>>  Cuba, under this sense of requirement, would depose communist leaders and
>> set up their own destiny with free election.
>> - Trade with Cuba ? The pretext said it all.
>
>I read a NY Times article saying that Castro is deathly afraid that the U.S.
>and other countries may try to use Cuba's econ. crisis as a pretext to begin
>trading with Cuba.  Mostly because he's convinced that he will lose his
>power quickly.  So basically he is turning the screws and putting Cuba on
>an extreme "war" footing.  Just thought I'd pass this along.
>
-----------

No. I don't buy it.

- What Castro needs now to continue his revolution is a healthy economy.
Communist regimes are very afraid of decline of economy which, in turn,
originates revolt. US embargo aims at just that.

Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Subject: Re: Is communism immoral? (was Re: Did We Lose?)
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 00:26:50 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.172936.16740@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
>Uh, quick note, communism is an economic system (as oppossed to capitalism)
>and is not necessarily a form of government.  

 [Since this has wandered completely away from the charter, I'll keep
this short.]
 Communism is to Government (note the capital G) what atheism is to Relgion,
namely, a variation on the theme.
 Communism's aim was the destruction of Government (the famous "withering
away of the State".)
 Until this happened, the powers of the State had to be assumed by the
Party, as trustee for the people, and viola! a new government.

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  #
From: hunter@wpi.WPI.EDU (George M. Berberian)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: The Deer Hunter (and Russian Roulette)
Date: 15 Oct 92 22:08:53 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu

In article <92Oct15.085421edt.48068@neat.cs.toronto.edu> quoctp@cs.toronto.edu (Quoc Tuan Pham) writes:
>eesnyder@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Eric E. Snyder) writes:
>
>
>>I was watching _Deer Hunter_ the other night and was predictably
>>horrified at the Russian Roulette scenes in the picture.  How common
>>was this practice during the war, both in terms of gambling and as
>>treatment of POWs.  Did this sort of thing happen often or is it 
>>just a Hollywood fabrication?
>
>It's just a Hollywood frabrication. Imagine the captor giving a loaded
>gun to the prisoners! Besides revolvers were not used by the communists
>(and by the Soviet Army). I really don't understand why so many people
>cannot see through this Hollywood ploy.

Hollywood frabrication???????????   Were you there?

george b.  pfc   101st Airbourne Div. Screaming Eagles and i've seen worse.
They don't let you take those pictures home.....just memories.

Hollywood frabrications. How could you imagine?
-- 
..................................../*\....................................
George M.Berberian                                   College Computer Center
hunter@wpi.wpi.edu (email)                       Worcester Polytechnic Inst.
GOOOOOO....PATS 11-5 in 92                          Worcester, Massachusetts
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer)
Subject: Re: Reasons We should Have Kept Vietnam
Originator: whitmeye@surf
Organization: MMAG, VAFB
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:51:07 GMT


In article <1992Oct13.164613.18074@b8.b8.ingr.com>, larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct13.055459.4075@den.mmc.com>, whitmeye@den.mmc.com (Richard Whitmeyer) writes:
|> > 
|> > In article <1992Oct10.203509.6375@wetware.com>, drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
|> > 
|> > Serious question here.  
|> > 
|> > Just what were the French after?
|> > My guess is we wanted access to the mysterious wealth too.
|> > 
|> > Rich Whitmeyer                The lesser of two evils, is still evil.
|> 
|> I think the french were just tring to hold onto what they had left of their
|> empire.  A question of a similar nature, what did Britian fight over the
|> Faulklands for?  I've never heard of anything they produce that is really
|> irreplaceable.
|> 
|> Larry Billings
|> 

Good point. The Faulklands provide access/control to sea lanes and little else.
I would suppose the Brit's might someday yield those islands, but no one will
take them by force. 
Like Gibraltar, Vietnam is well positioned to project power/influence from.
Perhaps that had some bearing on the value.

Rich Whitmeyer               Views expressed are solely my own.
                       (Well that's what everyone keeps telling me!)
From: olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu (Monte Olsen)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Date: 9 Oct 92 22:25:01 GMT
Organization: OSU Extension Service
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A6FB55CABF02A70D@reynolde-mac.ads.orst.edu>
X-Xxdate: Fri, 9 Oct 92 15:29:14 GMT
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d9

In article <PD.92Oct9152030@horus.sics.se> Per Danielsson,
pd@sics.se writes:
>Oh, yes is is very immoral. It is theft. I consider
stealing immoral.

Per,
You're arguing with people who are convinced of the
infallability of their opinions. You're not going to
change their minds.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Subject: Re: Merits of the Free Press
Reply-To: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: all
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 22:34:57 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.102350.10360@ida.liu.se>, yngla@ida.liu.se (Yngve
Larsson) writes:
|> 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.
|> 

	Yes, but they are OUR slandering, opinionated hypocrites :)
You just have to read critically.  Better to have the information than
none at all.  We need to know at least some of what our govt. is up to.

|> 
|> 	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?
|> 
	I would say that the lack of a free press in NV was just about the
least contributing factor to their victory.  Even if they had a free
press and it chose to be anti-war (highly unlikely), I doubt that their
citizenry would have responded to it in the way that some seem to
believe that the US citizenry responded to its press.

	As other posters have stated, the US press was also a small factor in
the US defeat.  We still would have gotten out, maybe 5 years later or
so, but the end result would have been the same.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 John Carr                           UNIX Support Specialist
 jbc4m@virginia.edu                  Academic Computing, Gilmer Hall
 804/982-4710                        University of Virginia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Why No Invasion of North Vietnam
Keywords: Invasion
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 20:40:31 GMT

Smith@biotec.arizona.edu (Roger A smith) writes:

] Does anyone have an idea why the United States or South Vietnam did not 
] invade North Vietnam?


The traditional answer is:

'the lessons of Korea'

There was the prospects that an invasion of North 
Vietnam would trigger a 'yalu river crossing' operation
by the PLA, just as in Korea. Or worse yet, given as
they Had Nukes, that there would be a nuclear exchange.

The SubPoliticalText was the problems with the wording
of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution - which allowed as how
we could send in troops to protect the air assets in
country from the threat of armed attack....

The Decay of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution is also what
made the 'side show' in cambodia an 'illegal operation.'

ciao
drieux



-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Don't Just Rock the Vote
Kick OUT THE JAMS!
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,soc.veterans
From: jerry@MicroUnity.com (Jerry Kreuscher)
Subject: Re: James Stockdale?
Organization: MicroUnity Systems Engineering, Inc.
Date: 15 Oct 92 08:45:48

In article <1992Oct14.183628.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> (Greg Franklin) writes:
   Who is James Stockdale?  From the VP debate last night I gathered that
   he is a former Vietnam POW and an academic, and is now running mate
   of Ross Perot, and has precious little to recommend him for the
   U.S. Presidency.

If he didn't compare well with the two other products of media
consultants for you, that's unfortunate.  For my part, he seemed real
compared to the surreality of the others on the stage.

   Was he ever famous during the war?  Did he serve with honor?  What
   kind of a person is he?  I apologize for not knowing much about him,
   but I figure now is the time to learn....

You could find a memoir that he cowrote with his wife.  I don't have
the title at hand, but it ought to be in the catalogue of your
library.  He's a real old-fashioned hero.  No wonder he doesn't sell
so well in this age of reaganesque heros.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen)
Subject: Re: Castro and other despots (was Re: Merits of the Free Press)
Organization: Energy, Mines, and Resources, Ottawa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:57:04 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.145634.10936@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) 
wri
tes:
>In article <1992Oct11.154658.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> 
f67700241@violet.ccit.a
rizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:
>>In article <BvvKqu.4y7@news.orst.edu>, Monte Olsen <olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu> 
wr
ites:
>>>In article <1992Oct9.164131.3571@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com writes:
>>>>such an enemy to deflect opposition.  The US provided
>>> such an enemy,
>>>>and continues to do so, at a lesser level, for other
>>> despots like
>>>>Castro.
>>>
>>> And, so what are you saying. That we need to ignore
>>> Castro, and like a good little dog he'll go away? Don't
>>> think so. That's an incredibly short-sighted view.
>>
>Is he going away now?  The "my country, right or wrong" attitude is not
>unique to any country.  To the extent it exists in communist countries,
>Us trade embargoes and similar policies help the dictators in those
>countries.  Is it a coincidence that the stalinist regimes of
>eastern Europe (that had relations with the west) fell just about as
>soon as the Soviet Union stopped enforcing its authority but the more
>distant communists countries that were the target of US containment
>policies are still going strong?  China is an exception because it is
>so big.
>
-----------
I don't thing they are still strong; they are sustaining weight of hardship.
In Cuba, almost oil comes from Soviets; in exchange they had to pay by many 
ways as tourism,sugar, tobacco, exporting workers and fighters. Now, without 
much hard currency, as required by Russia and foreign coutries, and with US 
embargo they have to reduce oil consumption. Cubans have to use more bicycles; 
machines having no new parts stay idle in factories; electricity is in strict 
quota; agriculture turns backward
to the time before revolution. The only thing Castro can do now is
to tighten more his control.
In Vietnam, they are trying to seduce investment from abroad; but without good 
exchange banking system and many embarrasment, many investors have withdrawn. 
Oil explorations result in non-economical
gain; except Bach-Ho. Pham-van-Dong recently sighs that, to us, rebuilding the 
country is thousand time difficult than fighting.
China is better with a call for an economic "revolution" based on a
market economy. This means that they put priority for economic growth
rather than ideology. Again, we must understand that free markets only
for goods and services, not for ideas.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: daudo@bcars201.bnr.ca (Dau Do)
Subject: Re: North Vietnam
Keywords: Invasion
Reply-To: daudo@bcars201.bnr.ca (Dau Do)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:13:02 GMT

In article <1992Oct11.220356.714@emr1.emr.ca>, knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim Nguyen) writes:
>In article <Smith.21@biotec.arizona.edu> Smith@biotec.arizona.edu (Roger A smith) writes:
>>Does anyone have an idea why the United States or South Vietnam did not 
>>invade North Vietnam?
>
>---------
>A very, very good point.
>As a ordinary citizen, back then, I heard that Nguyen-Cao-Ky would like to
>use his skillful and courageous pilots to make an all-out bombing Hanoi but
>US Administration, suppliers of bombs and aircrafts, did not agree.
>
The US did not agree because the Soviet could also move in !!
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam