The Vietnam War
84FRENCH INDOCHINA
The kingdoms of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia were ruled by China for 1,000 years. In the 1860s, France ejected the Chinese and began to rule the kingdoms under the name French Indochina.
In 1942, Japan conquered Vietnam and imprisoned the French rulers and soldiers. A Vietnamese resistance group was formed by Ho Chi Minh ("He who enlightens") called Vietminh (Viet Men). The United States trained the best of Ho's men to resist the Japanese; in return Ho provided the U.S. with intelligence on Japanese troop movements.
The Japanese confiscated much of the rice in Vietnam, which caused death by starvation for 2 million Vietnamese. In 1945, World War Two ended when Japan surrendered to the United States. Japan turned Vietnam over to Ho Chi Minh—who refused to release the imprisoned French citizens and formed a Communist government in Hanoi.
In order to handle the surrender of Japanese troops and their arms, a line was drawn across the middle of Vietnam with the Chinese in charge of the North and the British in the South.
INDOCHINA
France wanted Vietnam back, primarily because of the valuable tin mines it had built there. Ho Chi Minh made a deal with the French that they could reestablish control over Vietnam if they persuaded the hated Chinese to leave. China agreed and pulled out its 200,000 soldiers. The British left as well, and the French military moved in.
Ho Chi Minh had maneuvered adroitly. He knew he could not beat China—right next door to Vietnam. But once China withdrew, he made war on the much weaker French troops. By 1946, the French Army had taken control of Vietnam, driven the Communists into the jungle, and reinstalled former Emperor Bao Dai.
Ho Chi Minh was hiding, but the Russian and Chinese governments recognized him as the legitimate ruler of all of Vietnam. Ho was a Communist, and they were planning for Communism to rule the world, one country at a time. Russia and China sent immense amounts of armaments and ammunition to Ho to make guerrilla war against the French.
France was dead broke after World War Two. France sought and received financial help from the United States, which increased year by year. By 1954 America was paying 67 percent of France's costs to defend Vietnam against Communist guerrillas.
The French suffered from ambushes and night attacks waged by Ho Chi Minh. The French controlled both the day and the cities; the Communists controlled the night and the countryside. The longer it went on the less popular it became in France. The Red Chinese under Chairman Mao Tse Dung were now supplying heavy weaponry to the Communists.
The Vietminh were brave and excellent fighting men. They were extremely well led by General Vo Nguyen Giap, and accustomed to rough terrain. The physically tough Vietminh could traipse twenty miles a day through mountainous jungle. Their primitive footwear, rubber sandals cut from tires, made their feet as tough as iron. They used peasants on bicycles to bring up to 500 pounds a day of supplies to their lines.
Then the French made a terrible mistake. They built a huge fortress in a valley that had no strategic value whatsoever. It was hard to supply and surrounded by mountains. The Vietminh drew a tight circle around this base, on the high ground, of 50,000 fighters—four times the French force. The place was called Dien Bien Phu.
The Vietminh laid siege and began to shell the fort with Chinese artillery. They destroyed the only airfield, and thus the fort ran low on water, food, and medical supplies. The French government begged the United States to bomb the Vietminh with its Air Force, but their request was denied. Surrender was the only option.
HO CHI MINH
Ho Chi Minh was a founding member of the French Communist Party in 1920. He had studied under the masters of Marxism in Moscow.
Ho Chi Minh promoted the usual Marxist ideology: the Atheistic Communists against the most successful members of the community—landowners— 8,000 of which were executed by the Vietminh.
Ho's guerrilla forces grew to 335,000 men and gradually took control of most of North Vietnam by 1954. The French maintained 200,000 troops in Vietnam, and had armed 300,000 Vietnamese who pledged to assist them against the Communists.
The French lost 100,000 lives in their eight-year struggle in Indochina, and they spent $8 billion of French Treasury in the effort.
In 1954, a treaty was signed in which the United States, France, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Thailand, and the Philippines pledged to defend South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia against Communist aggressors.
North Vietnam had a population of 16 million; South Vietnam 14 million. The North had chronic food shortages, while the South always had a huge surplus of rice. Thus, the South was a target for Communist aggression to get at their food supply.
In 1959, Ho Chi Minh decided to "liberate" South Vietnam. His agents, the Vietcong, attacked teachers, doctors, and ambulances in the south to make villagers so miserable they would welcome "liberation."
When Ho Chi Minh died in 1969, his final words were: "I am going to see Lenin." And so he was.
RED CHINA
Red China wanted to surround itself with subordinate Communist satellite states, as Stalin had done with Eastern Europe, by imposing Communism in backward ex-colonial lands through arming and promoting revolution among peasants. As in Red China and the Soviet Union, the enemy was any person who had risen above peasantry by becoming educated and achieving some modicum of success.
Particularly despised were Christians since a Marxist state by nature is Atheistic. The majority religion of the people in South Vietnam was Catholicism. 800,000 North Vietnamese Catholics left their ancestral homes and fled to the South to escape persecution by the Atheists. They were rightly terrified of coming atrocities by the Atheistic regime of Ho Chi Minh. Many Catholics were brutalized. A favorite trick of the Atheist Communists was to pound nails into their heads simulating the Crown of Thorns.
China intended to establish Communist regimes in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Burma—with an eye on its ultimate prize: India. China directed Ho Chi Minh to infiltrate South Vietnam with guerrillas, later called Vietcong, to terrorize the peasants. They would attack rural villages without warning to torture and kill any villagers who would not swear allegiance to Communism. Thousands of peasant homes and entire villages were wantonly destroyed by the Vietcong.
PRESIDENT EISENHOWER
The French suffered a massive defeat at the hands of Ho Chi Minh's Communist forces at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, which prompted a cease-fire agreement. This agreement divided the country at the 17th Parallel (a line of latitude). The North was given to the Communists backed by the Red Chinese and Soviets; the South to anti-Communists backed by France. The United States was not a party to the agreement, nor were the South Vietnamese. The Agreement was between Ho Chi Minh, the French, the Soviets, and the Chinese.
America committed to stop the spread of Communism under the Truman Doctrine. President Eisenhower sent 2,000 military advisors to train the South Vietnamese Army, and the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) got involved as well.
President Eisenhower came up with the "Domino Theory." He acknowledged the publicly stated aim of the Soviets—to promote Communist revolutions worldwide—and felt the United States must help stop these revolutions or countries would fall like dominos to Communist uprisings backed by Soviet and Red Chinese armaments, training, food, and financing.
President Eisenhower said: "I cannot conceive of a greater tragedy for America than to get heavily involved now in all-out war in any of these regions." Eisenhower had been a great general and he recognized from long experience that the object of war is to destroy your enemy as quickly as possible with all means at your disposal. If he had sent the American Army to Vietnam, he would have won the war there.
PRESIDENT KENNEDY
In 1961, North Vietnam invaded South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh planned to make a single Communist country out Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
President John F. Kennedy approved a plan "to prevent Communist domination of South Vietnam." He upped the number of American "advisors" to Vietnam to 16,000 in order to secure the U.S. air base there. General Charles de Gaulle of France warned Kennedy about getting involved: "I predict you will sink step by step into a bottomless military and political quagmire."
Psychologically, a big part of the tough stance taken by President Kennedy, and later President Johnson, was because the Democratic Party had been shown to be the home to many Communists—and even Soviet spies—in the 1930s and 1940s. Johnson lamented that the Democrats had tolerated and even encouraged domestic subversion; FDR has lost half of Europe to Communism; President Truman had lost China to Communists. Politically, these Democrat presidents felt they had to "prove" they were not soft on Communism. Democrats were not going to lose another country to the Soviets on their watch.
President Kennedy had been publicly dressed down by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev; had done nothing to prevent the Berlin Wall from being built to imprison tens of millions of people under Communist oppression; and had launched the Bay of Pigs fiasco. He drew the line at Vietnam. Communists could have the North, but they had to leave the South alone.
The Communists had unified the North by force—coercion, torture, and murder to all opposition that did not leave. But the South, being free, naturally split into several competing factions. One of the factions were the Communists who, under no physical threat to life and property, remained in the South as agents for Ho Chi Minh. They fomented unrest until Ngo Dinh Diem took over as president of South Vietnam (in a rigged election).
The South Vietnamese Army was weak and cowardly. The Vietcong were fearless peasants who had been recruited by the Marxist dream: after we win you won't be a peasant anymore!
Ngo Dinh Diem formed a secret police unit to seek out the Communists in the South, who went underground. The Vietcong assassinated 500 South Vietnamese bureaucrats in 1962.
In 1963, President Ngo Dinh Diem,a Roman Catholic, was murdered, along with much of his family, in a military coup—with CIA approval. The coup was prompted because a number of Buddhists immolated themselves in public to protest the government of Diem. It turns out that many of these "Buddhists" were actually Communists wearing Buddhist garb.
The Communists are masters at manipulating Western Media. A telling example is that these "Buddhists" carried signs written in English for American television. The Vietnamese couldn't read them. Of course, the Communists have no free press for the West to manipulate, since all media is owned and operated by the State as an organ of propaganda.
A new government was formed in the South with a Buddhist premier, in the hopes that the Vietcong was cease their terrorist activities (Buddhism being an Atheistic religion more compatible with Marxism than any other). It did not help a bit.
Three weeks later, President Kennedy was murdered by a Communist. 47 Americans had been killed in combat in Vietnam as 1963 drew to a close.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON
With Kennedy and Diem dead, the South was in chaos. The Vietcong took control of 40 percent of the rural areas. China and Russia were determined to make all of Asia Communist. They would take advantage of the way the West valued human life.
To Communists, people are disposable. They were perfectly willing to see all 30 million of the Vietnamese people killed if it meant a victory for Communism. They knew they could "outstomach" the West.
The main road from North to South was dubbed the Ho Chi Minh Trail, as it was used to transport men and weapons into the South. Sabotage became common in the South.
In 1964, North Vietnam attacked American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. The ships were there to conduct electronic surveillance for South Vietnam. The United States Congress responded with the "Tonkin Gulf Resolution." This authorized President Johnson to do whatever he deemed necessary to protect American assets in Vietnam and "prevent further aggression."
President Johnson did nothing in Vietnam until after he won the 1964 presidential election—in which he campaigned as the "peace" candidate. He promised he would not send American troops into combat in Vietnam, which he described as a "raggedy-assed fourth rate country" not worthy American blood and money. Here he followed in the footsteps of his idols Woodrow Wilson and FDR, both of whom won elections with promises to keep America out of war.
In 1965, the Vietcong launched attacks on an American helicopter base and on U.S. barracks, killing 31 Americans, wounding 109, and destroying 18 U. S. aircraft. They also launched terrorist bombings against the Brinks Hotel (where Americans commonly stayed), and even the American Embassy. There were many deaths and hundreds injured.
President Johnson bombed North Vietnam in retaliation and ordered 75,000 American troops to South Vietnam. Johnson stopped the bombing after five days and made an offer to Ho Chi Minh: the United States would provide capital to develop all of Vietnam into a modern nation if Ho could bring himself to live in peace with his neighbors. Private notes show that Johnson fully expected a positive answer to this olive branch. Instead, he was flatly refused.
Months later, 43,000 more troops were sent. At first they were ordered to defend only. But soon they were unleashed to attack Communist positions on "search and destroy" missions. By the end of 1965, 184,000 American soldiers were in Vietnam.
The war changed after 1965, when the majority of U.S. soldiers were volunteers. In 1966, those volunteer soldiers were replaced with mostly conscripts. The courageous Vietcong respected American weapons but did not think the GIs were good fighters and they were very slow—weighed down with 60 pound backpacks. The South was by now full of saboteurs, forgers, and spies.
The American military advised Johnson that what needed to be done was to bomb North Vietnam quickly, heavily, and without restraint; and then to occupy the North with the American Army. The military advised Johnson they would need 850,000 men in theatre for seven years to produce a total victory. Johnson thought this too expensive because he had plans to spend trillions of dollars of his Great Society programs. He wanted a cheap win and so went at the Vietnam War quarter-heartedly.
Curtis LeMay, commander of the Strategic Air Command, said the best thing would be to flatten North Vietnam, to "bomb it back to the Stone Age." Johnson thought this too harsh and instead commanded limited, sporadic bombing of political targets. Apparently, he thought the Communists would give up. Instead, Johnson gave them time to build an immense network of shelters and tunnels.
The slow bombing idea also gave the Soviets time to ship tons of ground-to-air missiles to North Vietnam to shoot down U.S. planes. American bombers were forbidden by Johnson to bomb these missile sites while they were under construction, since Soviet technicians were building them.
Sixteen times Johnson ordered a pause to the bombings. He extended peace initiatives to the Communists 72 times. No response. Ho Chi Minh was determined to dominate the entire area at any cost. Casualties suffered along the road to this domination were shrugged off as simply the price to be paid.
HELICOPTERS
"The sight of 60 helicopters flying in formation and zooming into Ben Suc at treetop level was one which none who witnessed will even forget." Lt. General Bernard Rogers
In 1967 the new Cobra—the first helicopter specifically designed as a gunship—entered the war in Vietnam, to replace the Huey as the main attack helicopter. On many days, 2,000 Hueys were in the air.
Using Chinook transport helicopters, an entire battalion could be flown in to the point of battle.
ROLLING THUNDER
"Rolling Thunder" was an air campaign against North Vietnamese military and industrial infrastructure conducted from 1965 to 1968 by the United States. Bombing was targeted not to kill people but only to destroy war materiel. It was designed to make the Communists accept a divided Vietnam, as they had in Korea a decade earlier. Instead, it united the North Vietnamese as never before. And it failed to stop the flow of men and supplies into the South.
President Johnson declared entire areas off limits, including the major cities and a broad swath near the Chinese border. Port facilities and air defense systems—obvious targets in any war—were given sanctuary by Johnson.
Rolling Thunder was an interdiction program aimed at bridges, roads, and supply dumps—to stop the flow of Communist soldiers and their supplies into South Vietnam. It was carried out by F-4s, F-100s, and F-105s.
Rolling Thunder failed because Johnson mistakenly believed the Communists would respond rationally to the immense losses—50,000 soldiers—they suffered. Instead of weakening the Communists' will, they reacted with the gut emotion of defiance.
The tight restrictions placed on the Air Force as "rules of engagement" put American pilots at risk to avoid civilian casualties. In spite of this humanitarian method of waging war, the United States was criticized around the world by the same liberal press that remained silent about vicious shelling of South Vietnamese cities by Communist artillery.
America lost 938 aircraft during Rolling Thunder, all but 56 to anti-aircraft missiles Johnson had allowed the Soviets to install. Those 56 aircraft were lost in air-to-air dogfights against Soviet MiG fighter jets that Johnson refused to allow the Air Force to destroy on the ground. U.S. fighter jets downed 118 MiGs.
The American F-4 Phantom II was designed to shoot down MiGs beyond visual range with radar-guided Sparrow missiles and heat-seeking Sidewinders—but President Johnson prohibited this. He forced American fighter jets not to shoot until visual contact was made with the MiGs, which did not have this beyond-visual-range capability. This gave the MiGs a clear advantage because they were designed for close combat; they had superior maneuverability as well as guns and cannon. The F-4 had no guns for eyeball-to-eyeball confrontations.
Johnson's strategy of fighting a political war instead of a military war—with himself deciding the timing and level of operations rather than the military—was thought by Eisenhower to be doomed to failure. Johnson never waged it as a war. If he had the outcome would have been very different. Even the bombing targets were selected not as per military tactics or strategy but as political targets.
Admiral Sharp said: "We could have flattened every war-making facility in North Vietnam. But the hand-wringers had center stage . . . The most powerful country in the world did not have the willpower to meet the situation. "
Johnson's advisors broke into two camps. Half said "just blow North Vietnam off the map and be done with it." After all, if we can beat the Nazi War Machine, we can surely beat a bunch of peasants in sandals. The other half said "Just give up and bring our boys home." Johnson choose the worst possible path: the middle—a limited engagement with no exit strategy.
The restraint shown by President Johnson was interpreted by the Communists not as humane but as weak-willed. The American public strongly felt Johnson was doing too little—not too much.
Johnson gradually increased the troop levels in Vietnam to 550,000. But he never planned to win the war, only to prevent the Communists from winning. The purpose of all U.S. actions in Vietnam was to make the Communists quit. Johnson never understood that casualties meant nothing to Communists. But they had a great effect on the will of the American press and public.
The restrictions placed on bombing by President Johnson—to protect civilian lives and property—are what rendered it ineffective. Eventually there were 150,000 Communist fighters in South Vietnam. The Soviets and Red Chinese shipped in massive amounts of food to keep the Communists fed. Interdiction—the aim of Rolling Thunder—had failed.
Ho Chi Minh prepared three regiments to attack American troops head on for the first time. LBJ said: "There is still madness in this world."
AMERICAN PRISONERS OF WAR
Because President Johnson prohibited Air Force use of its clear technological advantages, hundreds of U.S. airmen were killed and hundreds more made prisoners of war by the Communists—who treated them with savage cruelty.
Naval airman Everett Alvarez was the first American Prisoner of War and the longest held in captivity. He was brutally beaten and tortured for eight years.
The Communist put American POWs on parade through towns in the North, where villagers would throw things at them. The POWs were routinely tortured. Those who "broke" and issued anti-American statements for the Communists to distribute to Western Media on film, suffered immense shame on top of physical horror.
ATROCITIES IN VIETNAM WAR
There can be no doubt as to the atrocities carried out by the Atheist Communists. But a group of Western Socialists, headed by Bertrand Russell —advised by Ho Chi Minh—held a mock trial in Stockholm in 1967, accusing America of war crimes. These charges had no basis in fact.
American troops faced constant danger from mines and snipers. They began to notice that the Vietnamese villagers never stepped on mines. Communist propaganda had convinced many poor peasants that Americans were there to colonize them, as had the French and the Chinese before them. Women, children, and the elderly were recruited by the Vietcong to kill Americans.
U.S. soldiers suffered from leeches and foot rot. It was often over 100 degrees and extremely humid. The Vietcong hid in miles of bobby-trapped trenches and tunnels.
By 1967, U.S. soldiers started to sense that what was going on over there was crazy. The troops began to suspect that the government was taking advantage of their bravery—their lives. They sensed that the enemy was all around them—often they were fired upon from all sides at once. It seemed that half of the people the GIs were trying to protect were in fact aligned with the enemy. Since they all dress alike, there was no clear way to tell who was who. One soldier said it dawned on him that "We are the Redcoats."
American GIs were sometimes pinned down all day and all night, under constant fire, in constant rain. There were times when 2/3 of a company was lost but helicopters could not get in to remove the wounded—some of whom begged their friends to shoot them because of the pain. Men lacked food, water, and were sleep deprived. So, they would order in artillery to flatten the village where the fire was coming from. If civilians—even Vietcong dressed as civilians—were killed, it was broadcast around the world, bringing forth condemnation on "heartless" Americans.
Vietcong villages were sometimes burnt to the ground. Napalm and Phosphorus bombs were used. Perhaps the worst mistake was the use of Agent Orange to defoliate the jungle. The Communists hid in the jungle where they couldn't be seen. If it was known that Agent Orange caused human disease and birth defects, it never would have been used. After all, it was used in American National Parks until 1978.
45 percent of the dead from the Vietnam War were civilians, tragically about average for twentieth-century wars—no more no less.
THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT
A group of American Radical Socialists that became known as the New Left opposed the Vietnam War as "an adventure in American Imperialism." Of course, that is not true because America never coveted one inch of the soil in Vietnam.
The New Left began to agitate on college campuses around America, in particular targeting universities that had ties to the military. But it was not just the Vietnam War the New Left hated—they hated America herself. To quote its leaders: "I learned to despise my countrymen, my government and the entire English speaking world, with its history of genocide and international conquest." Another said, "America . . . I hate what it is."
At some campus protests, Leftist students shouted together the name of their hero: "Ho Chi Minh!!!" Another hero idolized on posters and T-shirts was the murderer Che Guevara. The demonstrators sought an end to Capitalism—the very economic system that had built the beautiful college campuses they tormented; produced the unprecedented prosperity and freedom they were privileged to enjoy; subsidized their education at the expense of hard-working taxpayers.
The New Left was the most disloyal, ungrateful group of Americans ever born. To them the American university was an oppressive institution in an oppressive society.
It should be pointed out that most of the agitators were not students at all. Those from the SDS, Students for a Democratic Society,—an odd name for Communists—carried out violent beatings of counter demonstrators who loved their country.
Protest peaked in 1970 causing hundreds of American colleges to close. Many normal people joined the protests simply because they were a "happening" for young people. To protest was to be "good." Protests were also made against weapons manufacturers.
In 1967, 500,000 anti-war protestors converged on Central Park in Manhattan. They chanted: "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?"
When 250,000 protestors marched in Washington in 1969, it was broadcast on North Vietnamese television—as were most all student protests and anti-war speeches.
In 1971, a group of a few thousand "Vietnam Vets Against the War" protested on the steps of the U.S. Capitol and about fifty of them, including John Kerry, flung away their medals and decorations.
In 1972, American actress Jane Fonda visited Hanoi as a guest of the Communists. She made ten propaganda radio broadcasts in which she denounced American military leaders as "war criminals." When cases of torture began to emerge among POWs returning to the United States, Fonda called the returning POWs "hypocrites and liars." She added, "These were not men who had been tortured." Fonda further stated that the POWs were "military careerists and professional killers" who are "trying to make themselves look self-righteous, but they are war criminals."
Even as President Nixon was rapidly bringing the boys home, protestors carried signs of Nixon with swastikas. American radicals were Communists who worshipped Chinese Chairman Mao—that killer of 50 million human beings. They waved around Mao's Little Red Book and pictures of their other hero, Ho Chi Minh. Many waved North Vietnamese flags on American college campuses. The Communists rightly considered them part of their war effort. Films of the protests were shown to American POWs.
THE AMERICAN MEDIA TURNS AGAINST THE VIETNAM WAR
The American media supported the Vietnam War at first. But in 1967, the Eastern Media Establishment turned against the war with a vengeance. It began to twist and distort the news from the war to consistently show American efforts in a negative light. The Communists manipulated the American Media—full of journalists who were socialists themselves—with staged events, phony news releases, and "confessions" obtained through torture.
The media helped drum up resentment against the Selective Service, or draft, by reporting how unfair the draft was since it was easily evaded by the rich (by going to and staying in college). While this was true, it has been true of every war ever fought. It was presented as some kind of novelty. Only 2 percent of college students went to fight in the war.
Actually 77 percent of the American Armed Forces that served in Vietnam were volunteers, though conscripts made up 45 percent of the Infantry. Blacks came to resent the draft because 15 percent of the draftees were black, who represented 11 percent of the U.S. population.
The Media underplayed or failed to report American victories, of which there were plenty. They sensationalized any setback and focused on the "body bags" coming back home.
The Vietnam War was dubbed "the living room war" as it marked the first time in history that the nightly news featured actual combat—and film of wounded and dead soldiers and civilians.
Vietnam War Photographer Eddie Adams won a Pulitzer Prize for his picture of a South Vietnamese general shooting a Vietcong terrorist—who had executed 34 civilians in the previous few days. Adams later said he regretted the impact the photograph had. The image became an anti-war icon. Adams wrote in Time magazine: "The general killed the Viet Cong; I killed the general with my camera. Still photographs are the most powerful weapon in the world. People believe them, but photographs do lie, even without manipulation. They are only half-truths ... What the photograph didn't say was, 'What would you do if you were the general at that time and place on that hot day, and you caught the so-called bad guy after he blew away one, two or three American soldiers? The guy was a hero."
The other famous Vietnam War photograph that was used by the anti-war movement—including the American Liberal Press—was of a little girl running after being burned by napalm. The South Vietnamese Air Force accidently dropped napalm on civilians. The photograph was portrayed in the Liberal Press as Americans dropping napalm purposefully on civilians.
Napalm was first used in World War Two. The U.S. military employed it as a very effective weapon against Communist soldiers hiding in tunnels. The United States faced an elusive enemy and controversially resorted to napalm bombs against guerrillas who were dug into concealed positions.
The French took glee from American troubles in Vietnam. The French Press turned vehemently anti-American.
DRAFT DODGERS
The draft was dramatically expanded in 1965. Eventually, 137,000 American boys refused to report for duty—a first in American history. 22,500 were indicted; 6,800 convicted of draft-dodging; and 4,000 sent to prison for the offense.
The Supreme Court expanded the meaning of "conscientious objection" to serving in the military from religious grounds only to any grounds at all. As a result, 43 percent of those drafted in 1971 claimed to be conscientious objectors—an unprecedented development. 170,000 got out of serving in this way. In the Korean War, there had been only 7,000 conscientious objectors.
563,000 GIs received less-than-honorable discharges from the service. Another 570,000 evaded the draft illegally by hiding from the authorities, 40,000 of which fled into Canada. Eventually they were pardoned by President Jimmy Carter in 1977.
All of this made those who did serve in Vietnam quite angry.
THE TET OFFENSIVE
The Communists launched their largest attack of the Vietnam War in January, 1968, with the "Tet Offensive." Tet is the lunar New Year holiday, which had always been observed by all sides as a time of truce. The Communist hoped their invasion would spark a massive peasant uprising in the South, which never materialized.
The Communists attacked at 55 locations at once. It was a major defeat for the Communist forces, who suffered massive casualties: 40,000 of their elite troops lay dead. But the Liberal American Media—with violent offense to the truth—portrayed it as victory for the Communist invaders.
The Communists did catch South Vietnam and their American allies completely off guard and thus had early victories. They overran the old imperial capital of Hue where they promptly massacred 5,000 civilians—mostly bureaucrats and their wives and children. The United States had 221 men killed but took the city back in short order by killing over 10,000 Communist combatants.
5,000 Marines found themselves besieged by Communist forces at Khe Sanh during the Tet Offensive. Lockheed C-130 and Fairchild C-123 transports flew in supplies day and night under mortar and artillery fire. Transport helicopters escorted by helicopter gunships—the new "air cavalry"— hazarded hostile territory to carry out the wounded. Ground attack aircraft hammered the Communist soldiers. The men in Khe Sanh were saved by air power.
The Tet Offensive proved to be the decisive engagement of the Vietnam War—not on the battlefield but in the living rooms of America. Before these battles 56 percent of Americans supported the war while 28 percent opposed. A month later, polls show a 40-40 split. Millions had changed their minds. America was divided more by the Vietnam War than any event since the Civil War.
Time and Newsweek ran anti-war editorials urging America to withdraw. Walter Cronkite, the dean of American television journalists told his viewers the war was not winnable. Civil Rights leaders turned loudly against the war because they saw it siphoning off funds they wanted given to their constituents instead.
The Vietnam War ruined Johnson's presidency. He decided not to run again in the 1968 elections. It must be understood that the American People did not as much oppose being in the war at this juncture as they did Johnson's half-assed methods of waging it.
LBJ died a broken man in 1973. His heir apparent to the American presidency, Bobby Kennedy, was killed by a Communist as had been his much-worshiped brother.
PRESIDENT NIXON
The quest to win the War in Vietnam was over, though American troops would maintain a presence there for five more years. The question was how to get out and save face. 200 Americans were killed and 800 wounded every week of 1969 in the Vietnam War.
President Richard Nixon, as promised, gradually cut the armed force in Vietnam from 550,000 to 24,000 from 1969 to 1973; and reduced spending on the war from $25 billion to $3 billion per year. By 1969, the United States had spent $100 billion in Vietnam.
President Nixon sought to make the draft more equitable through a lottery system in 1969. Only nineteen-year-olds with low lottery numbers would have to go. In 1973, President Nixon eliminated the draft and made the military an all-volunteer force, which it has remained. That was the year before my number would have been called.
As the withdrawal of troops proceeded, morale of those in the war plummeted. Nobody wants to be the last guy killed in a war that we already know we won't win. Many of the replacement troops were anti-war and forced to go to Vietnam against their will. They knew they would return home not to a parade to honor their valor but to be called "baby killers" by Leftist protestors. In two years there were 730 "fragging" incidents—efforts by soldiers to kill their own officers with grenades. Drug abuse skyrocketed.
Tons of American supplies were stolen by GIs to be sold and bartered to South Vietnamese. A box of tide would bring 200 marijuana cigarettes soaked in opium. A vial of pure heroin could be had for $10. Speed, acid, and prostitutes were everywhere. 30,000 Americans came home hooked on heroin.
The GIs became racially polarized and racial violence increased dramatically as black soldiers walked around touting the Marxist revolutionary ideas of Malcolm X and Eldridge Cleaver, the latter who promoted the serial rape of white women as "an act of insurrection."
South Vietnam wanted democracy and feared atrocities if overran by the Communists, since atrocities are part and parcel of socialist ideology. Three million refugees had by then fled South to escape the Communist North.
In 1972, the Communists launched another massive offensive and took the northern province of South Vietnam. Civilians fled on the only road south, which was dubbed "The Highway of Horror" because the Communists shelled the fleeing civilians—with everything they owned on their backs and their children in tow—with tanks and artillery.
There came one week in 1972 when no American soldier died in Vietnam—for the first time in seven years. 5,000 South Vietnamese died that week.
Nixon was active at pursuing peace, first reaching an agreement with the Red Chinese in regard to Vietnam. Paris Peace talks dragged on for years. It took five months to get the Communists to agree on the shape of the negotiating table.
The Communists were inflexible, insisting on control of all of Vietnam, until President Nixon ordered intense bombing by B-52s of Hanoi and the northern port city of Haiphong on Christmas Day, 1972. For this America was excoriated worldwide in the Liberal Press. Only military targets were approved. Unfortunately bombing was not foolproof in those days. Bombers hit one hospital, some homes, and other non-military buildings by mistake. Three weeks later, the Communists agreed to terms.
To show how careful the American bombers were, only 1,318 people were killed in eleven days of massive bombing. Surely if the aim was to kill civilians the U.S. could have killed ALL of them. The Liberal Press acted like it was Hiroshima.
In 1973 a final peace treaty was signed with these terms: All fighting to come to a complete stop. South Vietnam to control its future through democratic free elections. Any future unification of Vietnam would come by peaceful means not by force. American ground forces would leave Vietnam. America would keep naval and air power in the area to enforce the treaty. And of course, Prisoners of War and the remains of the dead would be exchanged. 600 American airmen were released from the "Hanoi Hilton."
1972 BOMBING CAMPAIGN
The most powerful attack force used in Vietnam was the B-52 bomber. Until the very end of the war, they were not used in North Vietnam. The B-52 was used to carpet bomb Communist troop formations in the South, as well as their base camps and supply routes—in particular the famous Ho Chi Minh Trail.
Collateral damage to noncombatants, which inevitably made the nightly news, embarrassed the United States and weakened support for the war.
After the Communists reneged on agreements they made during the Paris Peace talks, by launching a major offensive against the South in 1972, President Nixon unleashed the Air Force. Air strikes through dense cloud cover from seven miles high by B-52s inflicted heavy punishment on North Vietnamese forces inside South Vietnam. In the North, fuel depots, roads, bridges, and railroads were destroyed. The Communists realized they could not win against American air power—even with U.S. troops withdrawn—and decided to agree to a peace.
The final American bombing assault was against Hanoi and Haiphong. The goal was to eliminate Communist airfields, missile sites, army barracks, and power stations. 15 B-52s were shot down but the Christmas Day bombing was quickly followed by an agreement that allowed the final withdrawal of American military forces from Vietnam.
THE VIETNAM WAR
President Johnson feared that if U.S. soldiers invaded North Vietnam, either Red China or the Soviet Union would send ground troops to defend it—thereby ignited World War Three. So his only goal was to prevent the Communists from taking over the South.
Two million Americans fought in the Vietnam War. 47,244 were killed in combat (57,597 dead altogether); 304,000 were wounded—100,000 with missing limbs; 2,483 are still listed as Missing In Action. 150,000 combat veterans from the Vietnam War suffered from drug addiction or severe psychological disorders.
The South Vietnamese forces had 224,000 killed and 570,600 wounded in action. The Communists suffered 660,000 killed in combat. 365,000 civilians were killed during the War—80 percent of those in South Vietnam.
The Vietnam War cost American taxpayers $150 billion. American boys, even those who went on to live well-adjusted lives, suffered from the stigma of a "lost war." They were not treated as heroes as had the boys who fought in World War Two and all previous wars.
The last American killed in Vietnam was Lt. Colonel William Noldy.
After seeing what became of Russians and Eastern Europeans after the Iron Curtain fell—tens of millions murdered or starved to death on purpose—the United States thought it should protect further peoples from such a fate. Utter oppression had befallen hundreds of millions of human beings already.
Atheistic Communism was the worst cancer ever known to man. In fifty years it spread from 17 crazy men to enslave 25 percent of the surface of the earth and 40 percent of all living human beings.
AFTER THE VIETNAM WAR
Eight months after Richard Nixon left the White House, Saigon fell to 100,000 Communist invaders who had been equipped for this last push by the Soviet Union. The United States Congress had cut off all aid to the South Vietnamese. The Communists were not welcomed as liberators by any stretch. The South Vietnamese were gripped by mortal fear and mass hysteria.
America had been militarily and politically castrated. The Soviet Union began to spread radical revolutions around the world through subversion and violence. When America abandoned its naval bases in Vietnam, they became Soviet naval bases.
The North Vietnamese broke the Paris Peace Accords in January, 1975, by invading South Vietnam. The North had built up an army twice the size of the South's. One million people fled Central Vietnam on foot with what little possessions they could carry to escape the inevitable atrocities that accompany socialist rule.
When the Communists overran South Vietnam in 1975, the United States did nothing. The last use of American aircraft in Vietnam was to fly people off the roof of the besieged U.S. Embassy in Saigon as Communist tanks entered the city.
The Communists overran South Vietnam and embarked on a program of "total social revolution" by "psychologically reconstructing individual members of society by stripping away, through terror and other means, the traditional bases, structures and forces which have shaped and guided an individual's life and then rebuilding him according to party doctrines by substituting a new series of values."
The goal of all Communists was to obliterate all bourgeois customs, behavior, and language with cruelty and inhumanity. The New Left in America supported this goal and longed to see it accomplished in America and around the world.
1.5 million Vietnamese fled their country in fear of the Communists in small craft, becoming known as the Boat People. Over half a million of them ended up settling in the United States. The same people who endured colonial rule by China, colonization by France, occupation by Japan, and 15 years of civil war, decided that the one thing they could not live through was Communism.
The claims of the New Left—that a Communist Vietnam would bring a new age of peace and social justice—went up in smoke. The smoke included millions of slaughtered Cambodians that gave us the phrase "The Killing Fields."
THE IMAGE OF THE VIETNAM WAR IN AMERICA
The 1978 film The Deer Hunter and the 1980 book America in Vietnam changed the way Americans saw the Vietnam War.
The Deer Hunter lovingly portrayed images of average American soldiers home from the conflict, who at the film's end movingly sing "God Bless America." It also depicts the brutal treatment American boys suffered when taken prisoner by the Communists that were so beloved by the New Left and Jane Fonda. The American prisoners lived in jungle cages where they were starved, beaten, tortured.
America in Vietnam dismantled the mythology of the New Left about the war, particularly its lying claims of widespread American atrocities put forth by its Winter Soldiers that featured future presidential candidate John Kerry.
Americans began to rethink the horrible treatment its young men had received when they came home from the war. Even some Liberals would regret spitting on these boys. The aggressors all through the war in Vietnam had been the Communists, after all.
Did we have no business being there? Was the sacrifice of the GIs worthless?
The POW/MIA flag became the widespread patriotic symbol it is today. In 1982, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was unveiled in Washington, D.C. President Ronald Reagan proclaimed a new message to the New Left: "ours was, in truth, a noble cause."
Vietnam is a beautiful and intensely colorful country.
SOURCES
My sources include the documentary film Vietnam: A Television History (produced by PBS); and the following books: A History of America by Paul Johnson; Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carroll Quigley; Decade of Nightmares by Philip Jenkins; The Fifties by David Halberstam; Flight: The Complete History by R.G. Grant: The Seventies by Bruce Schulman; The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Thomas Woods; and America: A Narrative History by George Brown Tindall and David E. Shi.
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (12)
- Funny (3)
- Awesome (20)
- Beautiful (6)
- Interesting (4)
CommentsLoading...
The war my Dad's friends fought.
Watching Walter Croncite at my Granpa's knee.
Ho Chi Minh trail/tunnel rats
South/North
Kennedy/Johnson/Nixon
draft dodgers/lowering of the voting age
war/military conflict
I saw her standing, elegantly dressed, her dark hair, perfectly coiled into a bun. Watching with admiration, I saw her kneel at "the wall", out of respect , I turned away,giving her tears privacy . Her image has never left my mind. Did she mourn a brother, a dad, a husband or a son?
I thank you for this perspective.
This is a wonderfully researched and done Hub. Very informative and interesting.
Great hub. I enlisted in the Air Force in 1967 because they were drafting men out of college and I wanted to have a little choice in where I was heading. Japan was the closest I got to Viet Nam. It was a time of memories, not all good.
Wow....this really hits home for me, James. I was actually in Vietnam and didn't even know its history. Sure, I knew about the French. I knew about My Lai. But, this was just simply awesome. Like Korean veterans, we are becoming the forgotten soldiers (or sailors in my case). I made mention of my time there on a hub of mine (wars and thanksgiving day) that I think illustrates the futility of fighting a war where the heart of the general population is just not in it. Winning hearts and minds? The hearts and minds of the Vietnamese was on one thing; getting their rice to market. They had no interest in political ideology. They had no interest in this war. Their interests were simple; leave us alone, let us live our lives in peace. I think the same can be said of most people. Again, great hub. I appreciate you doing this.
Great hub, after reading your hub, I feel I understand better the origin of the Vietnam War and how we got stuck in such a bad spot, very well researched....an interesting and informative hub...thanks for sharing.....great job James
Wow, you really did a wonderful job on this hub! Thank you.
Awesome in detail and the pictures are a perfect accent~~ my older brother spent time in Vietnam & this brought it home for me...thank you, James.
Hi James. I don't have to tell you that while Socialism and Communism are similar, they are not the same thing. I am certain that you are aware of that. The Vietnam War always interested me so I read a great deal about it and watched documentaries. It was my first "A" paper in college. So when I saw this in my e-mail, I had to read it immediately.
Jane Fonda was a pacifist and an idiot. She was against war in general NOT on the side of Ho Chi Minh. But she was an idiot because she went to North Korea and spoke against America. Any message she was hoping to get across about war being bad in general was then as good as lost.
My husband was also in the lottery for the war and had a high number. He went to fill out his paperwork and do what he had to do and explained to the gentleman there that he was a "conscientious objector". He told him that he did not believe in the war but did not hold that against the soldiers. He would support them in any capacity but he himself could not be a soldier as he refused to kill anyone.
This is an excellent Hub James, no great surprise, thoroughly researched and loaded with much information many do not know. It leans to the conservative side of course, but that aside, it is informative and well done. Again, this does not surprise me in the least as nearly all your hubs are done in this manner. Always impressive.
James, great hub thanks for compiling the information. History not learned from is destined to repeat its self.
Hi James,Great research on the history of The Vietnam War and a very interesting and awesome article . I came close to being drafted to fight in that war.
Awesome and vote up !!!
Great hub!
I remember in 1973, my brother being # 3 in the recruitment list, if they would have had one more push, he would have had to go. My God, how I hated Nixon, and all my neighbors that trooped up and down the street w/ placards of him...
This brings back such vivid memories- we should never forget this unwinnable war. Oh wait. We already have. Witness Afghanistan and Iraq. An awe inspiring hub...
Beautifully presented as always, James. I remember the Vietnam War from my living room where I watched in terror as a girl of 12 or 13 knowing my much loved cousin was over there fighting. Little did I know so was my future husband who did 2 tours.
It was a sad time much as today is a sad time with the Iraq and Pakistan wars - I remember writing to my cousin every single day (hard to believe I know) and sending him box after box of cookies and whatever else I could think to send.
Ironically, my son married a beautiful girl from Vietnam and it does make me think about how life comes full circle sometimes. I try and believe that over time, we have to have learned something from all these wretched wars but I think I am beginning to think not!
Anyhow, all that aside, your article as always is beautifully crafted and flawless in its information.
This is a fascinating history and retelling of the Viet Nam War, James. Thanks for your research and attention to details as always. You do know how to make historical facts even more interesting.
Awesome hub James, full of so so much info, you didn't miss a thing. I work with a lot of Vietnam Veterans and I'll be sharing this hub link with them, for I know they will appreciate all the work you put into this !!! HOOAH !! Got to tweet this now LOL
So if Johnson would have went ahead offensive, all of our people could have been saved a lot of pain and death.
I actually own a S&W 38 spcl that was USAF issue from early sixties that pilots carried in that war. It has seen action and as I look at it I wonder who may have carried it and the stories that it could tell. Lj
This is one of my most completer web document I read about Vietnam war.I think Vietnam war is a great lesson of all of us.Whatever happened in the past is past, I just hope no more repetition of war in any place on earth.I've voted it up and tweeted it.Thanks a lot.
This is a very good history on this terrible war. Thanks James, very well done! Lj
My father served one tour in Viet Nam. My parents' marriage ended in the wake of the war - he was a different person my mother said, he frightened her. A common experience for wives of returning soldiers I'm afraid, but before the final breakup they conceived me.
I agree with Sen McCain that asking soldiers to fight a war that citizens of their country don't support is wrong. Sen McCain's first marriage also ended in the wake of his return from Viet Nam. In one interview he sited this as his greatest regret in life.
My husband's uncle was a Green Beret in Viet Nam. He left the US in disgust after he returned from the war. He was angry at how the military was treated by the government. He married a Norweign woman and moved to Copenhagen. He told us the government did not want to win the war - that they had the training and the resources to win, but were not allowed use them. He won a metal for bravery while in VN, for exposing himself to enemy fire while setting up a flare so he & his men could be rescued from a pinned down position.
Thank you for this hub, James. Though the war impacted my life so much, I did not understand the large picture very well. I find clear information about the war hard to come by - perhaps b/c such an explosive topic for many.
graceomalley
An excellent comment. I agree with Senator McCain (a rarity for me) that we should never fight a war that our general population agrees we should not fight (as is the case in Afghanistan now according to recent polling). But, to take it a step further, we should never send our people to fight a war we don't intend to WIN. Such was the case in Korea and Vietnam. As I'm sure you have heard before, "It wasn't the communists in North Vietnam we couldn't beat. It was the communists in Washington D.C. we couldn't beat." That should be a footnote to both the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
A masterpiece of a hub and well detailed. I think there was a lot to Johnson which didn't meet the eye. Over here it was rumoured that he was involved with the CIA and especially, personally with Hooper (I am not sure if I spelt it right) and it was very concenient for him to there straight away at Kennedy's killing to be sworn in. Hooper was on the payroll of the Mafia. The CIA had a very bad name in those days. To start a war and not destroying military bases leaves questions open.
The Vietnam Was is one I never understood. Although your hub still hasn't settled that question for me, it has helped to put things in historical perspective. War is just not anything I understand.
James , excellent research , nothing more can be said except perhaps , In honor of my brother Al , serving there in the Marines ; He says and I quote," I would go back today and finish what we started to do and stopped", My oppinion now after all , is to hell with Vietnam , All of the efforts by those who sacrificed so much for OUR countries calling , for what! For Coka Cola , for Goodyear rubber , for the CIA's profiteering, For MacDonalds ,For the beginning of wars to be strategized from the whitehouse! We had better all wake up to the costs we inflict on our patriots before there are no more of them left......Before No one believes in America anymore. Oh yes! Thats already happening!
"When we no longer honor our patriots , we no longer honor ourselves", who said that anyway ? Oh yea , I did! Excellent hub my friend.
HI James;Your article was very informative,I now sorta comprehend the whole history of this terrible war.I wish the president had turned Gen.Curt LeMay loose for just one day with the B-52's think how many live would've been saved.Your ole buddy from Sun-Jet. I still miss all you guys. Estan Fuller
You did such a great job with this history. It seems to me you've distilled at least 10 books into this one article. Really, really like it.
This is such a great Hubpage. You have given a wonderful history lesson and it is very, very interesting. I was in the Army during the end of the Vietnam war, but never knew all these details. Thank you for a very informative hub!
An excellent accounting of the history of a very complex situation which the USA should have avoided at all costs. The use of the "Domino Theory" and the complimenting "Rimland Theory" which stated that those controlling the coastline would also control the lands became the springboards for US involvement under Johnson. In turn Johnson well-repaid some of his most ardent supporters like Brown & Root Construction Co. of Houston who did much of the deep water harbor work and built many of the airfields. His holdings in companies like Conex grew like wild fire. There were more conex containers in Southeast Asia than there were communists at the height of the war. Johnson also held interest in Flying Tiger Airlines which was a major troop movement contractor of the era. America had nothing to prove in Vietnam except our own fear of Communism as a growing threat. At the same time, we had a President in office who did not possess the balls to do what was needed to win the day. In the end we shed the blood of millions of innocent Vietnamese and the lives of 58,000 Americans for nothing more than a sham ending. We created hatred of our own military in our country and left those who served proudly in Southeast Asia as a group of forgotten veterans who had to spend the rest of their days apologizing for their patriotism in serving our country. We raised people like Jane Fonda up on to a pedestal of stardom and made her a very rich woman while all those veterans watched and remembered her actions in North Vietnam. There is much to be learned for this long period in hour history and I have read much on it trying to find some answers as to why. The Gulf of Tonkin was at best a staged situation which gave Johnson the license to wage war. That, in itself, shows you Johnson's desire to move forward and grow the situation. Here is a man who could cry on television over the deaths of America's innocent young men and then go back to the strategy table and deny them the very things that would have brought the north to its knees. When you say a "communist killed JFK", I do not tend to think of Lee Oswald, the patsy, I think of LBJ, the President. Thanks for an excellent write as usual, up and awesome. WB
I read every word of this article and I feel I am more educated about the Vietnam War as a result. I was born in 1974 so of course I have no memories of that time all I did know as a child was that Uncle Lyle had fought in Viet Nam and that he never talked about it.
Thank you so much for your hard work and research for this hub - one of your best as far as I'm concerned.
I think that if Bush had done his duty in Vietnam we would not have had a second Iraq war. I don't believe that anyone really wins a war they just get to write history. We went because we were young and we learned things no one needs to know. If those who vote to go to war would lead the way to battle, most wars would not begin. Good hub, bad war!
James - Thanks for telling a story that should be told.
When I think Vietnam I think Hamburger Hill. I think of young friends only children really that did not deserve to die like that and their parents who could never say that, even though they knew it in their hearts,how could they admit it? They all died for nothing and someone made sure as many went down as possible, there's never an excuse for America to not get in and get out, wars over...games...money...sometimes I feel like burning a flag.
Oh and I will never believe Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman, never. Hoover and Johnson and many mafia hated him and so that is why Bobby had to die too, that man was a set up too. When I think of Sirhan and Oswald I see two patsies. Oswald may have not even been the one who shot from that building, whoever did it could have had him thinking they were there to help protect the President. He was killed to keep him quiet there was way too much going on there to be so cut and dry. America was lost right there...those two brothers could have made America what it should have been and I am not Catholic. In fact Kennedy is the first president I ever looked at or listened to and I was just a child when all this happened. I was too young to have voted for Bobby but I would have if I could have. Of the two he was the real brains.
James-My father died three years ago, a stroke, then the next day a burst blood vessel. We were in contact the last 18 months of his life. He called my house unexpectedly - he had been searching for me for years apparently, had put together a list of 20 people in the United States and Canada who might be his daughter. Then he started calling through the list.
My mother left him when I was 10 days old - so I knew very little about him, no contact, only what she told me. I did get to go to his funeral, and I wrote about that here:http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Marshall-Islands-My-Fa
Someday I would like to write a memoir, and I think alot of it would be about him, and about the family history I learned from him. He also wrote (we emailed alot, and I still have all of it) a fair amount about the war.
James, Thank you for such a carefully researched report on Vietnam. I appreciate learning more about this crucial part of our history. The Vietnam War leaves much to learn from. :) Katie
wow! :) thanks a lot. added a very interesting piece of history into my brain. well researched. intense :)
James, thank you for so much clarity. If only the world could have always had it, it would have been better off. God Bless You Brother. Wonderful work.
Very thorough, James. Thanks for helping me get a better grasp of the Viet Nam War, er conflict. The picture of the ground troops really summed it up for me. These were young kids who hadn't bathed or slept in weeks or months, their sense of self worth in the toilet, seeing atrocities no one should have to witness, being led by a government that abandoned them and didn't seem to have their best interest in mind! And all for naught.
Your historical hubs are always the best.
Ray
Eisenhower was a legend.
Sorry I was misunderstood. First I do not remember Eisenhower, but remember never hearing any bad about him. It was Oswald I think was used to look guilty of Kennedy's murder and killed to be kept quiet not JFK and what I have heard from his wife(Oswalds) I think even more so since then, he was just a patsy and we all know Jack Ruby was involved somehow(besides killing Oswald). I really get into these studies and that is my gut feeling.(Actually maybe just a gut feeling about Johnson too, but he wouldn't head back to DC without being sworn in President and made Jackie stand right there with Kennedy's blood all over her..I just never liked him and have read books of others who think he was involved. Hoover hated the Kennedy's whether he was in with any mafia or not he would certainly help them get a Kennedy you can be sure and although Bobby and JFK's dad may have had some dealings with the mafia, even to become wealthy (but I remember none of those details) those brothers didn't and actually it was Bobby going after the mafia and Jack stood behind him, really it was common knowledge about that.
i find this article on this war offensive. Forrest gump, charlie sheen, and ben stiller ALL faught in this war, yet none of them are veitnamese
Thank you ever much for saying so, Ray. I do appreciate it.
URL Vision - Web Directory | Free Website Submission FREE Internet categorized Web Directory with SEO Tips & Tricks.
Sorry I am not really bantering or don't mean to be. Jack Ruby was seen with Oswald in his bar or whatever business and yes I too heard JFK was a womanizer and mostly after Marilyn Monroe who indeed was in with mafia men and I could never understand him with a broken back and a beautiful wife being such a disgrace against her and whether the mafia had anything to do with Jack or vice versa I could not say but I can't believe anyone would not have heard of Bobby Kennedy going after Jimmy Hoffa big time.So this is the last I will say as long as you know for a fact at least Bobby had nothing for them and I am sure this proves it. Bobby was the brains behind JFK, too bad he had no control over the one he let rule him. Just had to let you see this.
James - Historically correct and spot on. Many of us don't want to, and won't, talk about the experience. I was spat upon in the San Francisco airport and called all sorts of nasty things. There was no respect for the US military during that era and that is so tragic.
Up and awesome.
The Frog Prince
Hello James,remember me?People sit in cafes and bars examining war from a rational,political,religious or other point of view but...the concept of right and wrong,political correctness,and God are the first things shed by combat soldiers or they become a casualty,simple as that.Anyone passing judgement,in order to have credibility,Must have been a participant.Why do you suppose we all used the phrase"Back to the world"and"Freedom bird".When war is declared the first called upon should be the children of those declaring it,simple cure don't you think?Thanks for the memories my Friend.To quote a friend I'll never forget"It was the worst of times and it was the worst of times"Great though painful Hub bro.
Dean
Well, Websters says you are right, so I sincerely apologize, but I didn't mean to insinuate it as fight either. OK, I admit it, I loved Bobby, he could do no wrong in my eyes and I just had to clear him, I will say no more.
You've always warmed my heart James and I thank you for that.What ever happened to"Tipping"a few with me at Scully's pub bro :)
Superb telling of the tale! Just amazing.
this awed me and I did not know much of this even though I have read some history of the war there....thanks so much for sharing your knowledge with us
James you are so amazing! Always giving us the most out of your Hubs! I appreciate you very much and just wanted to stop by to let you know this. You will always be a blessing to me, ALWAYS! Much love... Voted-Up!
Mr. Watkins, I have always loved the study of history. This Hub is by far the most clear, concise and HONEST paper I have read on this subject. You speak the truth, removing the murkiness that so often permeates American history. Most young people today are spoon fed revisionist history, not learning the TRUTH unless they seek it out for themselves. God Bless.
a great hub no doubt but it pretty much biased i think all i saw was the atrocities of communist but i couldn't find a con over the capitalistic forces .i think its to much of a carry away .But still it was very informative yet contradictory to what my Russian sources have to say still i guess a neutral point of view is very hard to find.And i guess the only reason u lost the war was because of ur president ?
Thank you for bringing this story to life!!! Wonderful! Keep writing stories like this...very educative...
A detailed and comprehensive article on Vietnam. I will say, though, that there were Vichy French working with the Japanese against the Americans and local resistance during the 2nd World War. Perhaps the Vichy French thought a portion of Vietnam would be given to them at war's end if the Axis forces were victorious.
Ho was more a nationalist than a Communist. He wasn't a Communist in France in 1919 but became a Communist when it was only the Russian Communists that would agree to give him what aid they could. He went to the British. No can do. He went to the Americans. No dice. He even went to the French asking for more self rule for his people. No way. Mind you in 1919 the Reds were not yet in a position to help or hinder anyone but at least they listened.
The French wanted Vietnam back after WW2 not only for tin but also for rubber. In fact the most outstanding battle to take place between Vietcong and Australian forces during the Vietnam War basically took place in a rubber plantation.
Yes, you are right about the animosity felt between the Chinese and the people of Vietnam. What we call Vietnam today was once part of China. It broke away and was only just enjoying not being part of China when the French stepped in.
I doubt if the people of Vietnam would have become Communists subordinate to the Red Chinese. On the other hand, accepting aid from Red China to secure their freedom from French and then American rule was something else again.
As you point out Ngo Diem was the South Vietnamese version of a mafia chief. He was accepted by the Americans because he claimed to be a Catholic. He became proof in the USA and Australia that the Catholic Church and quite possibly Christianity as a whole had lost its way. If you are keen on supporting a crook then you are either corrupt or have no idea what you are doing.
I don't know about the South Vietnamese soldiers being weak. The Australians found them to be okay fighting men.
Personally I don't see the protesters at least in Australia as being disloyal to the government. They simply felt that we had entered the war without full knowledge of what we were getting into and that there was no real end in sight. Australia pulled out in 1972.
Yes, as you say the Americans won the Tet offensive. The Communist forces were driven back but it did show just how much Communism had infiltrated the south. It showed just how much the people of Vietnam simply wanted to run their own country without the help of outsiders. The Communist forces lost the battle but won the P.R. war and thus years later the war itself. Yes, the Tet offensive was the turning point.
I think Ho Chi Minh wanted to unite Vietnam and oust the foreigners. What's more, many believed that he would not be particularly forgiving of those who had taken up Christianity. Unlike Buddhism, Christianity was seen as a foreign religion. It had been brought into the country by the hated French. Thus Vietnamese Christians did have something to worry about at the end of the Vietnam War. Thus you do have Vietnamese Christians today and/or their descendants living in the USA and also in Australia. You can check that out if you like. Its no secret.
James, HO saw Communism as the only way of unifying the country. There are very few absolutes in this world. A so-called Christian society/country such as the USA contains plenty of non-Christians including those of the Jewish faith, Muslims dating back to the days of Malcolm X, Atheists, and assorted Agnostics.
The French used the Catholic faith in their colonialism. It became a symbol of French rule and then rule by the West. By putting the wrong guy in charge of the south simply because he was supposedly a Catholic enforced ill feelings toward Christianity in both the south and the north. Buddhism may have originally come from elsewhere but it had been part of Vietnamese life long enough not to have the stain of the conqueror about it. When Buddhists came to be ill treated in the south by the so-called Catholic despot the West was seen as imposing an oppressive system upon the Vietnamese.
I get the impression that HO didn't really give a damn one way or the other about religion. What I can say is that Buddhism wasn't seen as a problem to his version of Communism and there are many versions of Communism. None of them are flexible enough for the long haul so to speak but there are differences.
The USA had two open invitations to do something about Vietnam before the Vietnam War. There was 1919 and later there was the end of the 2nd World War.
Giving Vietnam back to colonial interests rather than helping the Vietnamese people find their way to an independence they had been seeking since the 1840s was a bad move. The men who fought alongside the Americans to free the country from the Vichy French and the Japanese felt betrayed. After all they had done you are eventually going to give the country back to the French? Yes, this was betrayal. With the aid of the USA a unified Vietnam would have quickly dropped Communism and developed their own form of government which I am certain would have gone along more conventional Capitalist lines. Until the betrayal they were grateful to the Americans for their help in dealing with their enemies. Something good could have been built upon this foundation. But there was making the French happy and the cold war was on the horizon. A second golden opportunity was lost and so there had to be a Vietnam War.
Yes, there were Atheists in Communist Vietnamese society as there are Atheists there right now. But were they and are they practicing pure Communism as outlined by Marx? Well no one has actually done THAT.
Yes, retribution against Catholic Vietnamese was wrong.
We agree on some things.
I don't believe in the present day existence of an entirely free press. It is something to aim for but it hasn't existed in England or the USA for some time now. Did it ever exist? Well there has always been libel laws and there has always been censorship of one form or another.
Soon after US troops came into Iraq a local journalist was arrested and jailed for writing the truth about the American occupation. Much of the news Americans watch is pablum. It is human interest fairy floss.
I know because when I have a late night shift American news is the only thing on tele. And if I have to get up real early to go to work Good Morning America, well, the show isn't even all that serious about the weather.
People get used to sanitized news in their newspapers, on television and on the internet. Just because there is a lot of news programs and newspapers doesn't mean that the public is getting hard hitting journalism. I think Australia in terms of news does a better job than the USA and that is scary. With America's resources it should be around the other way. Check out the history of WikiLeaks. Some frightening film footage made it to the internet of how some USA forces conduct themselves in other countries.
Australia became a Federation in 1901. White women got the vote in 1902. This was way before women in the USA got the vote. Even so, it wasn't until the 1970s that Aborigines in Australia got all their rights as Australians. I know that African Americans were not made into American citizens after the emancipation proclamation. It was another decade before they obtained any rights at all. Certainly in the '60s Martin Luther King was fighting for human rights for African Americans. So neither the USA or Australia has always been that good when it comes to human rights.
I agree with Micky in so far as the involvement in the Vietnam War by both USA and Australian forces should never have come about. I don't believe in the domino theory which cannot really be proven one way or the other. Nowadays I see the Vietnam War as upholding colonialism, French or otherwise, in South East Asia. If the French had come to better terms with the people of Vietnam in 1919 a lot of bloodshed could have been avoided. If something could have been worked out after the defeat of the Japanese circa WW2 then we would have no need to discuss a Vietnam War involving Americans. There have been bad decisions and lost opportunities.
As I have mentioned before, James. Ho tried the democracies, the capitalist countries in 1919 but no one was interested in a Vietnam run by Vietnamese. No one was interested in curbing French rule in Vietnam. Only the Russian Communists had anything to offer. So in 1919 the only way forward appeared to be through communism. Yes, unification could have happened through democracy and capitalism but the democracies and capitalists had better things to do at the time.
It has been an ongoing thing since Roman times. How do you unify an empire? Why you do it by having all the people under one religion. When the sun god didn't work out the Romans turned to Christianity as the unifying religion. Sure, keep your old gods but the STATE religion was Christianity. You want to be a mover and a shaker? You become a Christian.
The Holy Roman Empire which was created by Charlemagne operated on similar principles. When Europeans conquered the new world they brought Christianity with them. Christianity was a way of breaking up the old cultures and religions and generally cementing the conquered lands into being part of a developing empire. French missionaries made Indochina more French by spreading the French version of Christianity. One religion/ one empire. Colonialism expands and consolidates through the use of one religion. Sure, other religions may be tolerated for a time but move the social and structural basis of life in any region to those who support the new religion coming in and see what happens.
The Medieval mystery plays of England hold many secrets concerning the forbidden beliefs and religions of the people. When the Church became so powerful that the old ways could be banned they went underground. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is an excellent example of hiding beliefs based on nature in an otherwise Christian package.
Playing two potential conquerers against one another was played with success by Siam in the 19th Century. England wanted Siam but didn't want to start a war with France or any of the other colonizing European nations to get it. The same could be said for the French. Playing the French against the Chinese makes sense to me. There were still high hopes of working something out with the West. The Vietnamese fighters had, after all, helped the Americans to defeat the Japanese. Surely the Americans and also the British might help with negotiations with the French for more autonomy. Nor so. Hence betrayal.
Today capitalism of a sort is being practiced in Vietnam even though Vietnam is still considered to be a communist country. Actually capitalism has taken root in China and also in Russia. Vietnam trades with the West nowadays. Many television parts are manufactured in Vietnam.
It would be nice to end the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Well, there have always been two schools of thought on the domino theory. You have picked one or it has picked you and I have picked the other one. As for what the Americans wanted to do with Vietnam if they managed to get Vietnam I would say keep it dominated by the West. Possibly keep it in trust until the French could return. The British did this for a while so why not the Americans? The point being not to allow it to fall into communist hands or what were really nationalist hands. Oh, there would have been a puppet ruler, a local, but the USA would be pulling his strings. The idea of putting a Catholic in charge of the south says a lot about America's intentions for the rest of Vietnam. No I never said the USA wanted to colonize Vietnam just re-establish colonial rule where it once existed.
Conflict between Church and state is as old as Christianity itself. The fact that first you bring in the soldiers then the preachers come is also very old. Doesn't matter if the soldiers work in with the preachers. The result of both turning up is invariably the same. The subjugation of the people in two different and distinct ways.
I am sure evangelical fervor is real. The Catholic preachers who burnt irreplaceable works in the conquest of Mexico were driven to do so by their faith. The Church in driving out pagan beliefs in England in medieval times were also driven by faith. I just wonder if evangelical fervor is always destructive.
The Church has been a very important arm in government in the past. During the French revolution churches were sacked by the peasants because the Church had supported the monarchy while they starved. This is why the French do not want symbols of anyone's faith in public schools and other government establishments. They want state and religion to be separate. Still they brought Christianity to Vietnam or the preachers swiftly followed and, whether it was intentional or not, Christianity did make an impact in politics. It inevitably led to a despot being put in charge of the south under the Americans. For some reason the Americans forgot that the Mafia also claim to be Christians. An Asian style Don? Maybe they thought that was better than a Commie or a Buddhist.
Actually in some countries missionaries have acted as the clue that creates a united Europe. If all the kings are Christian then intermarriage which stabilizes peace can come about. In the dark ages there were marriages between pagan and Christian but certainly the pope of any era wanted Christian to marry Christian. The thought of one god, one religion, one empire, one world persists to this day.
Perhaps the first step towards peace is developing a respect for other people and for their opinions and beliefs, especially when they do not align with our own. I respectfully read your entire hub and all the comments and learned an immense amount. I was living in Bangkok during the Vietnam war. We owned the 447 Guest House, where many service men spent their time on R&R. One of my clearest memories of that period was building small punji stake pits which we hid on our sand badminton court. I have no idea why at 5 yrs old we were building these small pits, but to us it was a fun game. I sincerely apologize to anyone who may have gotten hurt on our court. We were too young to understand our own game, or what it meant.
As an adult, I still don't understand what happened or why? Thanks for trying to sort it out, but your hub and the comments it generated left me with even more questions.
After WW2 the countries that were under British control until the Japanese took over came once again under British control. In Malaya there was resistance to the re-establishment of the area as a British colony. There was communist activity and bloody fighting. Australia was involved on the side of Britain. After much bloodshed the communists were ousted and the people making up Malaya got their independence. Malaya today is basically Malaysia. So re-establishing European colonies dis happen in parts of South East Asia after WW2. Why not Vietnam?
What did Vietnam have that America could want? I would say rubber. It was still a rather valuable item and it is a valuable item today. What else? Its closeness to Communist China made it valuable. The question has been raised, however, concerning what the Chinese would do if the USA and her allies managed to secure both the south and the north of Vietnam. Would there then be a war between the USA and her allies and the Red Chinese? Would the USSR be brought into the fray? A cousin of mine who was an Australian soldier serving in Vietnam believed that there was no way of defeating the enemy because the US President (first LBJ) wanted to cut the sort of deal that was cut with Korea. There was the fear that if the north fell to the Western powers Australian and American soldiers would find themselves running up against a million Red Chinese soldiers on the boarder. With Russia having the A bomb this would be extremely dangerous. with China in possession of the A bomb even more so.
I am not politically correct. I can honestly say I was a victim of it back in the 1990s. Right now I am attempting to write about my experiences. What political correctness did in the offices throughout Australia was swap possible old victims for definite brand new ones. On an American television program around this time there was this young blond American woman who came up with the theory that only white Anglo-Saxon males can be racist or sexist. Being a woman she was in the clear. Nonsense? You bet. But it was acceptable under political correctness. So who do I think can be racist and or sexist? Why everyone. Doesn't matter your sex or your race. Whether you are or not is the question. To me picking on white Anglo-Saxon males the way this woman did made her both sexist and racist in a really weird way. I don't know how many people would get that even today.
It is hard to know how many people in the world today long for their pagan past. Some of it still exists. How Christian are easter eggs and rabbits at Easter? Christ's birth was moved to a time in December important to the old sun god. Winter is the time when the old year dies only to be reborn into a new year. A good time for hope. A good time for the birth of a savior. Spring is a time when everything is new again. A perfect time for resurrection. There is the may pole in Britain. Young maidens still dance around it. So paganism isn't completely dead. It is still celebrated in documentaries and some television shows such as in the British series Robin of Sherwood (1984-1986). Unlike the present day Robin Hood series, it actually had grittiness and was an honest treatment of the legend.
No, the French revolution was not a good thing. it solved nothing. I was merely pointing out the anger the French peasant felt for the Church that had kept him in his place and didn't seem to give much of a damn whether he starved. The Church had become fat and lazy and I am sure in your terms somewhat unchristian.
Well, James an attempt was made to control alcohol in the USA. It was called prohibition and it led to a lot of bad things happening. There was a lot of illegal alcohol around. Some of it was dangerous. People who drank the bad stuff went blind, mad or just plain dead. Gangsters got big defying the law. Prohibition simply did not work. Having alcohol as legal at least allows the US government to have some control over quality. Why buy the rough stuff that may do you real damage when you can buy the approved stuff that won't do much damage if taken sensibly? The next thing to do is educate people on the consumption of alcohol. It has turned out to be the best way. Alcohol consumption has a long history in too many countries and it is too easy to make. Most fruits and vegetables can be made into some form of alcohol.
James, there is control and there is cutting your loses. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work for the reasons stated. Also it could easily be smuggled in from Canada in the north and Mexico in the south. To re-establish some control and also get much needed revenue from alcohol the USA government brought Prohibition to an end.
As for how to deal with the drug problem in the USA, education may help. The big problem with a lot of the new synthetic drugs is that the ingredients to make them are readily available to everyone. Apparently some forms of cough medicine figure into the new drug trade. With drugs, especially synthetics, there isn't centuries of tolerance and acceptance to combat. This is an important consideration.
Hi James-
Terrific information! I myself was told some of untruths about the Vietnam war. Ho chi mihn was certainly no saint as he has been portrayed by liberals.
Any semblance of respect that I might have had for American leftists is now almost entirely gone.
President Johnson was at best dangerously misguided and at worst a traitor, thats probably a bit harsh but I'm not sure?-Regards-WBA
Well, James, one of the reasons prohibition came to an end was because it was costing the government a lot of money. The gangsters were using cash from bootlegging to fund other enterprises including legal ones. The end result was gangster empires. The depression meant the government was hungry for revenue. Getting rid of prohibition meant the government could tax drinking alcohol. Another factor that made prohibition difficult to maintain was the fact that not all forms of alcohol could be or in fact were banned. There was alcohol used in perfumes and in cleaning solutions. There was also alcohol used as a preservative agent.
Yes in the Victorian age drugs that are banned today were not only tolerated but easily purchased. There is the story that cocaine was an additive to certain brands of cigarette. I believe Lucky Strike was such a brand. Also there is the story that cocaine was once part of the formula for Coca Cola. Laudanum was popular as a painkiller in London and created many an addict. Laudanum is liquid opium plus wine. You add more drops of opium to the wine as your addiction grows. Regardless, we are not talking centuries of acceptance.
For alcohol consumption we can go back thousands of years to where it is embedded strongly in the culture. Wine dates back to at least Ancient Egypt and the same can be said for beer. Sure, modern Egyptians are mainly Muslim and not into alcohol because of their religion but this is a very different culture from what was practiced in ancient times. For the most part we are even dealing with virtually an entirely different people.
Champagne dates back to the latter half of the European middle ages. Whiskey Irish and Scottish style also dates back centuries. Bourbon isn't anywhere near as old as the rest being American but it is still old and embedded in the local culture.
@James A Watkins: To Mickey Dee, you wrote: "Shame on you for being such a turd in public."
Bravo! :-)
Wow. I'm thinking of the the latest hub I wrote and I hadn't even seen this one of yours yet. Makes me look like I was trying to throw a bucket of water on a forest fire. Now I understand where Micky's comment came from, because it seemed out of place on my hub, but he must have equated mine with this one. So, I'll probably have to apologize to both of you for appearing to wade into the fray between you when I actually had no clue what was going on.
I give you votes across the board, except funny. I can;t imagine anything being funny. I know it had to take a long time to research and right this, so it is the least I can do. I don't know much about this war. I here hundreds of accounts, but nobody will ever know the full truth. It is hard telling who they worked with on the side. Really isn't relevant now. Everything always seems to be political. It was way before my time so I only know what I read. I couldn't imagine being there. My grandpa was there and he told me crazy stories and he is all messed up, physically and mentally. He is an alcoholic now. Can't say I blame him. He still has nightmares and everything. I just couldn't imagine being there. So much loss. James, hell of a job.
You take a few papers! mix all the facts up and that's what a james watkins hub is !! Oh I forgot to say that you insult and malign not only many learned people ,but also these poor hangers on of yours who are fooled by your 'bending' of the figures and the facts. By portraying part- truth you almost get away with it but your overlying theme is acid-laden..
Not truth-full reporting,
regards jandee
Methinks it easier to win the lottery than to get
james watkins to admit his futile utterings of untruthfulness. Many hubs of his have the same misinformation. If the truth is told then honest people recognise and indeed appreciate it.
jandee
DoG (GOD) almighty !! I shouldn't be having a Larf !!!!
It's a serious matter!!! You James watkins are so hilarious in your delusions !!! I believe,as John said , God is a concept! So, if that makes me an atheist well and good!
At this moment in time I don't 'belong' to any political party, but if I formed one you wouldn't be allowed entrance! I wouldn't want 'The Cheshire cat' but Alice would be acceptable !
For your info. I am a Socialist and not arrogant enough to be in the priveleged position of having communist as a title- That is a thing I try to be ! although you couldn't be expected to have any understanding in such an area.
(Sorry, must swap computers) jandee
James !
I don't know how your country works! Here in U.K one would be in court in double quick time for the things you have said. Quite dangerous things really, I think, for your own sake, you should withdraw the slur you made.
regards jandee
Thank you for a well-written & extensively researched narrative on a much maligned and volatile subject. This Hub presented a neglected persepctive to an issue that has been so obfuscated by those of an obvious ideological distemper. But enough about the info-mafia we call the news media! I found it ironic and amusing that a few detractors took great lengths to ridicule themselves by their own absurd and asinine comments. I'm glad you left the comments for the rest of us to read. It seems as if they unwittingly presented the best defence to your Hub by their egregious display of their own nonsensical vitriol. The contrast between your sanely coherent article and their deranged comments could not be more apparent. Perhaps a firm grasp of history is the best antidote to prevent a mentally incapacitating descent into lunacy?
What you doing !??
Got to keep asking other writers if you're correct?
























































Chasuk Level 5 Commenter 14 months ago
Great hub, but I'm confused. You write, "But a group of Western Socialists, headed by Bertrand Russell —advised by Ho Chi Minh—held a mock trial in Stockholm in 1967, accusing America of war crimes. These charges had no basis in fact." No basis in fact? You have a photo of the My Lai Massacre, with the caption, "MY LAI MASSACRE COMMITTED BY U.S. TROOPS IN 1967." Isn't that contradictory?