Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was Vietnam War to prevent North Vietnam from enforcing the 1954 Geneva Accords?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

    I'm just speechless that you'd issue a rant that does not castigate the United States.

    In Readers' Digest form, did the '54 Geneva Accords recognize the sovereignty of the RVN, and what conditions did the DRVN fail to satisfy. That should address the issue in this thread, at any rate.

    Guess now I'll owe you a 50-gal beer.
    IIRC, 1954 was the year of the boat lift by the US Navy out of Haipong. Ho Chi Minh was 'purifying ' The NVCParty and over 40,000 of his followers were sent for re-incanation.

    fortunately, the massacre stopped.
    Uncle H o was not always Ho H o.....



    The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

    Comment


    • #17
      BTW, Slick, if you are driving the special needs bus in Canada you are also riding inside the special needs bus.I know, our bureaucratic rules.......double rim shot...
      The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by RiderOfTime View Post

        How about the reunification of the country, which was demanded by the Accords?
        Perhaps it's like Virginia and West Virginia.....NO ONE AFAIK, is looking to reunite them.....
        The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by marktwain View Post
          Perhaps it's like Virginia and West Virginia.....NO ONE AFAIK, is looking to reunite them.....
          That is not an equivalent analogy. Vietnam has always been ONE SINGLE country. There was no "North Vietnam" and "South Vietnam", but only "northern Vietnam" and "southern Vietnam".

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
            I'm just speechless that you'd issue a rant that does not castigate the United States.
            I sincerely hope that is one of your 'rimshots' slick. While I dislike your nation's political right (though I am rather fond of some of its individual members), I am extremely fond of your nation as a whole.

            In Readers' Digest form, did the '54 Geneva Accords recognize the sovereignty of the RVN, and what conditions did the DRVN fail to satisfy. That should address the issue in this thread, at any rate.
            OK, I'll try to whip something up, though it might be a bit weightier than the RD version.

            Guess now I'll owe you a 50-gal beer.
            I am hoping to visit your fair nation in 2020 and Brooklyn is definitely on my itinerary, so I may hold you to that.

            Oh, and if you are after a Socialist for me to play against your Joe McCarthy I think Wilfred Burchett is more apposite.

            Human beings are the only creatures on Earth that claim a god and the only living thing that behaves like it hasn't got one - Hunter S. Thompson

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by RiderOfTime View Post

              That is not an equivalent analogy. Vietnam has always been ONE SINGLE country. There was no "North Vietnam" and "South Vietnam", but only "northern Vietnam" and "southern Vietnam".

              s


              the question remains -was it?

              from Biafra to South Sudan we have seen the perils of this sort of shotgun marriage.
              from the POV of the French and America! indeed the west, in 1955, Ho chi MINH'S purges showed no sign of stopping.

              Sometimes partition is the only, cruel choice.

              The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by marktwain View Post
                s


                the question remains -was it?

                from Biafra to South Sudan we have seen the perils of this sort of shotgun marriage.
                from the POV of the French and America! indeed the west, in 1955, Ho chi MINH'S purges showed no sign of stopping.

                Sometimes partition is the only, cruel choice.
                From the POV of American president Esenhower, 80% of Vietnamese population supported Ho Chi Minh. Who were the French and America to defy them?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Eisenhower might have said something like that, but what did he actually do? He sent military aid and equipment to what was called South Vietnam. Besides, what is now called Vietnam was ruled as three different "Kingdoms" by the French. These were Tonkin, Annam and Cochinchina. Just because Vietnam calls itself The Democratic Republic of Vietnam now does not mean the area was one political entity in 1954. Kind of how the Kingdom of Cambodia became Democratic Kampuchea after the Khmer Rouge took over.

                  Pruitt
                  Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                  Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                  by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by RiderOfTime View Post

                    From the POV of American president Esenhower, 80% of Vietnamese population supported Ho Chi Minh. Who were the French and America to defy them?
                    https://blog.vvfh.org/2016/04/the-19...ion-elections/

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      From CIA analysts: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-f...s/vietnam.html
                      Recognition of the Vietnamese Communists' (VC) enormous advantages.

                      CIA's analysts were aware that the basic stimulus among the politically conscious Vietnamese was nationalism and that, following World War II, the VM had largely captured the nationalist movement. Ho Chi Minh's apparatus came to be better led, better organized, and more united than any other of the competing, divided nationalist Vietnamese parties. Through a combination of some reforms and ruthless elimination of political rivals, the VM/VC dominated the countryside. Local populations seldom volunteered intelligence to the French, the South Vietnamese, or the Americans about Communist-led forces in their midst.

                      Then, too, the VM's 1954 victory over the French at Dien Bien Phu and the end of French rule had been tremendous boosts to nationalist sentiment and Ho Chi Minh's status and popularity. At that time, most observers of Indochina affairs, including US intelligence agencies, judged that if nationwide elections were held, the VM would win by a large margin.

                      A similar view was even shared by DCI Allen Dulles, who, according to the record of a 1954 NSC meeting, told that senior group that "The most disheartening feature of the news from Indochina . . . was the evidence that the majority of the people in Vietnam supported the Vietminh rebels."
                      Another source, Studies in Intelligence: CIA and the Wars in Southeast Asia:
                      In the wake of the Geneva settlement, then DCI Allen Dulles told Eisenhower's National Security Council that victory in the battle of Dien Bien Phu had tremendously boosted Hos popularity. If elections took place as planned in July 1956, Ho would easily win and bring all of Vietnam under communist control.
                      [...]
                      In an effort to reduce Ho's popularity and maintain a friendly, noncommunist Vietnamese government, the Eisenhower administration began to bolster the regime in the south.


                      Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
                      Eisenhower might have said something like that, but what did he actually do? He sent military aid and equipment to what was called South Vietnam. Besides, what is now called Vietnam was ruled as three different "Kingdoms" by the French. These were Tonkin, Annam and Cochinchina. Just because Vietnam calls itself The Democratic Republic of Vietnam now does not mean the area was one political entity in 1954. Kind of how the Kingdom of Cambodia became Democratic Kampuchea after the Khmer Rouge took over.

                      Pruitt
                      1. He admitted that the majority of Vietnamese people supported Ho Chi Minh, but he still sent his force to fight against him. So we can conclude that the US sh*t on the will of the Vietnamese

                      2. Tonkin, Annam and Cochinchina were the division created by the French. Before the French came, Vietnam was ONE country. So after Ho Chi Minh aborted French domination in Vietnam in 1945, that division automatically ended.
                      Last edited by RiderOfTime; 20 Nov 18, 12:14.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        I sincerely hope that is one of your 'rimshots' slick.
                        Don't you know when you're having the pi$$ taken? Aren't Aussies supposed to be kings of sarcasm? (Proudest moment of my life was when one of your compatriots said that I was too sarcastic for his tastes. )

                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        While I dislike your nation's political right
                        I suspect that that's because you've not encountered our political left.

                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        (though I am rather fond of some of its individual members)
                        As we all are of you.

                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        I am extremely fond of your nation as a whole.
                        And naturally I feel the same way about . . . . where it you're from again?

                        Rimshot

                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        OK, I'll try to whip something up, though it might be a bit weightier than the RD version.
                        Much obliged, sir.

                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        I am hoping to visit your fair nation in 2020 and Brooklyn is definitely on my itinerary, so I may hold you to that.
                        Just bear in mind that quantity tends to cut into quality. And public urination is now legal. Apart from that, you'll be fine.

                        Originally posted by BF69 View Post
                        Oh, and if you are after a Socialist for me to play against your Joe McCarthy I think Wilfred Burchett is more apposite.
                        Damn! That Aussie sarcasm stereotype is for real, eh. So that bloke's like the commie Aussie journalist version of Donald Trump.
                        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          This shows the Eisenhower quote being used was inaccurate. There were other factors that prevented an election in 1956, like the Soviets being opposed to a supervised "free" election, and The VM were purging the landowning class.

                          Pruitt
                          Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                          Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                          by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            P,that liink doesn't open.WhatOur new correspondent misses is that theState serves it's' citizens. Not the opposite.
                            The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The link is in Post #24 above, try using it there. These guys are misquoting and leaving stuff out. I was suspicious about the quote coming from Eisenhower. If a guy about to be president says this and two years later has already gone down a different path something is not right.

                              Pruitt
                              Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                              Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                              by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                What Vietnam did do is keep Malaysia, Singapore, and Indochina from becoming Communist. Both Malaysia and Indochina had active Communist insurgencies going at the same time as Vietnam. Both failed because neither the Soviets or Chinese had the means to support these while trying to keep North Vietnam from collapsing economically from the war it was engaged in. The Soviets in particular, and the Chinese to a lessor extent, were putting all their aid into winning in Vietnam and that starved and eventually led to the failure of insurgencies elsewhere in Southeast Asia.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X