HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rod@unislc.uucp (Robert Despain)
Subject: Re: Tim O'Brien
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 04:15:31 GMT

Read "The Things" some time ago and found it true to my
experience (3rd MarDiv, Tourane (Marble Mountain or Danang East,
if that means anything anymore)) even though O'Brien was writing
about much later in the war and much further into the jungle.
(Truest part was about driving around town after getting back --
forget the name of that part.)

Just read "Going after Cacciato" last week and was disappointed.
Seemed to me sort of formulaic -- kind of a combination of "Cat's
Cradle" and "Land of Elephants" (or some such -- Asa Baber's
novel about fucking around in Cambodia).  Does anyone else recall the
really bad novel about the sixties (includes some vietnam scenes)
by John Hersey -- "Too Far to Walk"?  Parts of GAC were almost as
bad as TFTW (except nothing can be quite that bad (except maybe
John Wayne)).

Still, I think Tim O'Brien is a good writer (despite winning the
National Book Award) and I'm going to be tracking down the stuff
he's written so far that I haven't read and what he writes in
the future.

Cheers,
R.O.
(May be worth adding that I've done the course work for a Ph.D in
English and taught lit for a few years (U of Hawaii).  Don't know
if this gives more or less credence to what I've said.)
--
R.O. Despain                  |
Mature Products Group         |  Internet: rod@unislc.slc.unisys.com
(801) 594-4633                |      UUCP: ...!{sun, uunet}!unislc!rod
-- 
R.O. Despain                  |
Mature Products Group         |  Internet: rod@unislc.slc.unisys.com
(801) 594-4633                |      UUCP: ...!{sun, uunet}!unislc!rod
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: adamkp@rs6210.ecs.rpi.edu (Peter Adamkovics)
Subject: Re: Lost the War?
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:29:04 GMT

markb@iplmail.orl.mmc.com (Mark Bower) writes:

>First off, I would like to say how surprised I am to see a rational
>discussion occuring here. I figured something called alt.war.vietnam
>would attract only two types: the Kill Them All and Let God Sort Them
>Out type, and the Peace - Even If I Must Kill You First type. It is
>reassuring to see rational viewpoints about Vietnam for a change.

>My main point, however, is to ask exactly what people mean when they ask,
>"Did we win Vietnam?" I suppose the straight response would be 
>BATTLES: yes, WAR: no. I am not sure, however, that either of these
>questions is the one which matters and which has been mentioned briefly.
>Namely, did the US achieve it's _objectives_.

>In example, ask yourself this question - "Did Britain WIN the First ( or
>Second ) World War?" Stupid question until you consider the fate of that
>nation after the war. It was the US which rose to pre-eminence over Britain.
>Economic victory overrides moral, idealogical, and miltary victories.

If that is always true, then Japan won world war 2?  They are certainly doing
as well, if not better than the U.S. is economically.  I will say that ecomonic
victory is important, but that is not how one decides who "Won" a war.  
As to your first question, the U.S. lost the war.  They pulled out from 
Vietnam because they realized how much it would have cost to win.  Which
was too much.  Another point, which was brought up by others, is that the
US didnt accomplish its objective, which was to halt the spread of communism.

But anyway, I dont really think it was possible to win this war, I can't 
recall any war won by an army fighting on someone else's soil.  The 
indegeneous population will always try to throw off the yoke of the 
conqueror, and will eventually succeed.  By the way, I havent taken much history
lately, so if you can refresh my memory that would be great.  I guess the 
American Indian is one case where the conquerors won.  there are a few others where 
the losing civiliztion was completely wiped out, but in modern times??


well anyway, i kinda go sidetracked..... later

-pete- 


*******************************************************************************
*      Peter Adamkovics          *XOXOXOX*BeastieBoysNINRushMetallicaF242PWEI *
**********************************OXOXOXO*NirvanaTheToastersMinistryPearlJam  *
*E-mail address:  adamkp@rpi.edu *XOXOXOX*MightyMightyBosstonesSkinnyPuppyRHCP*
*Phone:(518) 274-9436            *OXOXOXO*Jane'sAddictionRiseRobotRise808State*
*Amiga: The only computer !!     *XOXOXOX*So many groups, so little time      *
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell)
Subject: Re: NamVet Newsletters vol.4
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 20:56:59 GMT

In article <48228@shamash.cdc.com> bru@svl.cdc.com (Bruce McCutchen) writes:
>
> I missed the first NamVet Newsletter vol. 4 and would like to know
>if someone can repost or tell me how to get the past volume.
>
Stay tuned to this station.  We'll be getting ALL available 'NamVet Newsletters
up on the mail server at the Veterans Information Site in the next few
weeks and make a formal announcement as to how to access the site.

Until then, stand easy and smoke 'em if ya got 'em.

WHILE we're at it, if you want to contribute to the V.I.S., send a copy
of the material to the address below or reply to this post. We're after 
EVERYTHING of interest to veterans or friends of veterans.

Epsilon Tau Sigma, the veterans' fraternity here at Purdue is sponsoring
the site and we have 2 criteria for submissions:

1. It has to be relevant to Veterans Issues (damn wide area!)
2. Purdue doesn't land in court because of it. (So use some judgement :-).

That's it.

We are getting all back issues of USAF, USN, ARMY, et al, news bulletins,
including verbatim transcripts of news conferences.

We'll be announcing formally when the details are completed, but if
you have any questions now, contact me through this group or by email.

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  #

-- 
#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@m.cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: Elections
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana,  IL
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:36:19 GMT

In article <goose.717910088@camelot> goose@camelot.bradley.edu (Bradley
Riley) writes:
> I can slightly remember reading about an election held in Vietnam to see
> who the population supported.  I believe Ho won but the US said that the
> elections were corrupted.  Any info out there.  Sounds really fishy to me.
> Did the US renigged on our policy of the power of the people.

The short version (all I have time to type in):

According to the peace treaty between the French and Viet Minh, Vietnam was
to be divided into North and South temporarily, with an election held
shortly thereafter to determine who was to govern the (re-united) country. 
Apparently there was a strong concensus in the Eisenhower administration
that Ho would win the elections so they were called off.  (For sake of
brevity, I won't comment on "corruption" or illegal foreign interference in
Vietnam's affairs).  This was in the mid-1950's.
-- 
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."
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Date: 6 Oct 92 22:00:30 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <PD.92Oct6023954@horus.sics.se> pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson) writes:
>In article <1992Oct3.105750.203@doug.cae.wisc.edu> mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
>
>>Admittedly, during the rolling Thunder campaign, we did bomb North
>>Vietnam, but that was such a short period of time compared to the
>>length of the war.  We tied our own hands.  In no way should the US be
>>accused of trying to "win at any price"
>
>Even during "Rolling Thunder" there were restrictions on the
>targeting. Amazing, really. If I had been a military commander at
>that time in that theatre of operations I think I would have resigned
>as quickly as possible.

Considering the high population and determination of North Vietnam,
an invastion of N Vietname probably would have been as costly as an
invasion of Japan would have been for WWII.  Considering that the
military were constantly telling the Us people and leaders that the
war was just about won, how do you think the US would have reacted
to such a committment?.  Also, the occupation would have had to be
long-term.  In any case, since the S Vietnam government never really
controlled the countryside in the south, just the main cities and
roads, any invasion of the North would have been pointless.  The
evemy was not just "on the other side of the border", they were
throughout the south.
>--
>Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
>Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough)
Subject: Re: Purpose of the press
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison
Date: 2 Oct 92 18:13:59 CDT
Originator: mccullou@sun-20.cae.wisc.edu


In article <1992Oct2.175930.11954@access.digex.com>, dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz) writes:
|> This is a little off topic, but since we are discussing the press, let
|> me add a thought.
|> 
|> The decision makers of any government need intelligence in order to
|> make their decisions.  Thus we have the CIA and other intelligence
|> agencies.
|> 
|> In a democracy, the people are decision makers for the government.  They
|> too need intelligence.
|> 
|> It is my belief that a primary function of the press in a democracy is
|> to act as the people's intelligence service.  In many ways, journalism
|> is akin to spying.
|> 
|> And let us never forget that intelligence services often get in the
|> habit of telling their customers what they most want to hear...
|> 
|> Any thoughts on this?
|> 
|> Joe Dzikiewicz

Yea, how do we prevent it in the future?

:)M^2
From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Lost the War?
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:28:21 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <3=jz91a@rpi.edu>, by adamkp@rs6210.ecs.rpi.edu (Peter Adamkovics):
> But anyway, I dont really think it was possible to win this war, I can't 
> recall any war won by an army fighting on someone else's soil.  

Modern times is hard.  As for non-recent wars, the Punic Wars are a
classic example (the Romans were very good at keeping their conquests
in general), as is the Ilias.  One point is that often, even if the
invaders prevail, they eventually mingle with the rest of the
population and are absorbed culturally over decades or centuries, but
these would still fit the definition.  E.g., the Mongols in China, or
Alexander's conquest of Persia. In the 19th century, there would be
the Boer war, the Crimean war, and the Franco-Prussian war as prime
contenders.

-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison
Date: 30 Sep 92 12:44:39 CDT
Originator: mccullou@sun-16.cae.wisc.edu


A lot of people seem to not have understood what I meant when I condemned the
behavior of the press in the Vietnam War.  What I am condemning is how the
press reported things in such a one sided manner.  For an excellant example,
there was a leader of the VC who was captured (I believe this was around the
Tet offensive).  He was bound and blindfolded.  A South Vietnamese soldier
berated him about how this VC had killed his family, etc.  He pulls his
sidearm and points it at the VC, but doesn't fire.  Next day, the press
shows this beatiful picture of a South Vietnamese soldier executing a POW.

The press was more interested in a sensational story.  The press has no
buisness going fowarded with the advance troops and patrols because frankly,
they aren't soldiers.  They are dead luggage to protect, that doesn't know
what to do, and is unable to help return fire if fired upon.  Yet when
fired upon, you can bet they will give this incredible story.  The reporting
that was done was too biased.  How many times have you seen a properly
unbiased story?  Not too often.  Yes the press needs to be free, but during
war, they should be away from the battlezone where they get shot.  It
happened.

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?
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: rod@unislc.uucp (Robert Despain)
Subject: Re: Books on Vietnam - _Dispatches_
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 04:44:42 GMT

John Gerth (gerth@watson.ibm.com) wrote:
: Wasn't "Dispatches" just that - a collection of Herr's journalism
: for Esquire and Rolling Stone?  As to what proportion of journalism
: is fiction, that's an age-old question.  
: 

Maybe someone can help me out. Didn't "Dispatches" appear in an
earlier form as "Illumination Rounds"?

Illumination Rounds was dead to rights (according to my
experience).  If "Dispatches" isn't the expansion, please go back
and re-interpret my earlier postings.

Cheers,
R.O.
-- 
R.O. Despain                  |
Mature Products Group         |  Internet: rod@unislc.slc.unisys.com
(801) 594-4633                |      UUCP: ...!{sun, uunet}!unislc!rod
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Subject: Re: Movies on Vietnam
Keywords: movies
Reply-To: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: all
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 22:31:01 GMT

In article <schuck.717476250@sfu.ca>, schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce
Jonathan Schuck) writes:
|> fishkin@parc.xerox.com (Ken Fishkin) writes:
|> 
|> >    Anybody else seen the recent (excellent) documentary on the
making of
|> >"Apocalypse Now"? I think it's called "Hearts of Darkness", and
|> >talks briefly about the links between the novel and the movie.
|> 
|> "Hearts of Darkness" was superb.
|> 
|> I loved the chance to see parts of the 'plantation' scene.
|> 

	Hearts of Darkness was very good, it provides a great deal of
insight into the making of the film.  I wish that the plantation scene
had been included in Apocalypse Now, a reference to the French source
of the whole quagmire would have made the movie more complete.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 John Carr                           UNIX Support Specialist
 jbc4m@virginia.edu                  Academic Computing, Gilmer Hall
 804/982-4710                        University of Virginia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: pd@sics.se (Per Danielsson)
Subject: Re: Did We Lose?
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science
	<1992Sep30.124440.28171@doug.cae.wisc.edu> <5373@gold.gvg.tek.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:35:21 GMT

In article <5373@gold.gvg.tek.com> mikea@zorba.gvg.tek.com (Michael P. Anderson) writes:

>The war was lost precisely because its goals were immoral, and the
>men who led that war were also immoral.

What's immoral about fighting communism?
--
Per Danielsson				pd@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: What Did We Lose?
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 17:41:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.155607.615@emr1.emr.ca> khanh kim nguyen <knguyen@emr.ca> writes:
>--------
>About the press ?
>Free speech is one of the basics of democracy. It must be accompanied by 
>integrity, truth and fairness. 

Since when?

> Did they report what behind the 
>scene at My-lai or why an police officer shot a terrorist who, a moment 
>before, threw a grenade in the protesting crowd ? You would see on the 
>newspaper the pictures with not much comments.

Comments wouldn't help: the picture would be remembered long after the
comments had been forgotten.

The problem with the press is that vivid images sway people more then
do rational words.  

Come to think of it, that may be more a problem with people than with
the press. 


Joe Dzikiewicz
From: hxt0424@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (   )
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: How could the United States have won?
Date: 27 Sep 92 14:57:48 GMT
Reply-To: hxt0424@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology

In article <5951@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>, mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) writes:
>From article <na0n88.clarka@netcom.com>, by clarka@netcom.com (Andrew Clark):
>> How could the U.S. have achieved its objective in Vietnam?  
> 
>> The objective I'm speaking of is the "official" one -- preserving the
>> existence of South Vietnam as a nation favorable to U.S. interests while
>> preventing North Vietnam from becoming an outpost of China or the USSR.
>
>It should be noted that North Vietnam was never an outpost of China -
>the Vietnamese are fiercely independent of China.  (I would also say
**************************************************
You are r!! We were, are and will be always want to independent of China or 
other countries.
>they never were "an outpost of the USSR" any more than the Philippines
>under Marcos were "an outpost of the US".  They shared the same
>ideology and cooperated, but the North Vietnamese were strongly
>nationalistic.  I also think that their move into Cambodia was mainly
>motivated by power politics, not by ideology, perhaps somebody can
*****************************
Right....!!!!
>comment on that.)
>
>I think the preservation of South Vietnam once the separation had been
>established would not have been obtained without decades of continued
>US military presence and fighting and continuous attempts to find a
>publicly accepted government instead of a sequence of what amounted to
>petty dictators.  The main strength in the North was public support -
>the population was so indoctrinated that they really believed they had
>to liberate the South.
>
>The communist takeover in North Vietnam (i.e., the ousting of the
>French) could probably only have been avoided if the French had had
>the grace to realize that their time was past and established a
>democratic government in 1946 after the Japanese had gone.  Instead,
>they clung to Vietnam as their colony and watched passively as the
>Viet Minh (literally) eradicated the more democratic independence
>movements, assuming that it would be easy to deal with the communists
>afterwards.  Everybody knows how that worked out.
>-- 
>Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
>University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
>Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drk@m.cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr)
Subject: Re: NGO DINH DIEM
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana,  IL
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 00:48:11 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.212500.19848@lgc.com> tuan@lgc.com (Tuan Nguyen)
writes:
>The fact is, "self-appointed" should be the more accurate term to describe
>the government of Ngo Dinh Diem.

I would venture even further than this: Diem was very much "appointed" by
his American patrons (such as Col. Edward Landsdale, I believe) because of
the potential they saw in him as a political leader, then propped up as the
president through massive American aid.  At the time, the politics of the
South were extremely factious, with various sects (the Hoa Hao, Cao Dai,
and Binh Xuyen) serving as virtual governments in many provinces, and there
were many different political organizations in Saigon, none particularly
predominant. Diem barely managed to prevail over these sects and remain in
office: I believe his army actually had to fight and win an open battle
against one of them (the Cao Dai perhaps?) in the late 1950's to let him
retain even minimal control of the South.  It wasn't the case that he had
built up a large loyal following over a long period of time, as had Ho for
example.  [Frances FitzGerald's _Fire in the Lake_ discusses this period at
some length.]

>Diem's aloofness and distance from the very people he claimed to represent
>prevented him from truly understanding what the people really wanted.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Tuan Nguyen

This aspect of his leadership style does seem well-corroborated by all
accounts I have read; his laws limiting political dissent seem to have been
very unpopular among intellectuals and students, for example.
-- 
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."
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Elections
Date: 1 Oct 92 18:52:27 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <goose.717910088@camelot> goose@camelot.bradley.edu (Bradley Riley) writes:
>
>	I can slightly remember reading about an election held in Vietnam
>to see who the population supported.  I believe Ho won but the US said that
>the elections were corrupted.  Any info out there.  Sounds really fishy to
>me.  Did the US renigged on our policy of the power of the people.

Actually, the elections were cancelled because the US knew that Ho
would win.  The west claimed that this was because the north had
more population, but Ho's status from victory over the French
should have been enough.  Maybe the north had their own elections,
but I don't know.

>	(I would look it back up in a history book but the ones I read
>	 are all biased-  How about rewriting the history books and only
>	 including facts   ie Indians massacured - Calvary attacked  re-
>	 written as Calvary massacured little children and women, Native
>	 Americans defended)

I would recommend Karnow's book, whose name I don't have handy.  It is a
collection of articles and essays and includes extensive excerpts from
the Pentagon Papers.  The Pentagon Papers provide an unprecedented
historical record and no study of the facts of the US involvement in
Vietnam can be considered complete without them.
>

>--
>and if i should falter
>would you open your arms out to me
>we can make love not war
>and live at peace with our hearts
>		A little respect                  Bradley A. Riley
>	        Erasure-the innocents	 	  goose@camelot.bradley.edu


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam