War Atrocities

[Anonymous]

On the topic of Lincoln saving the Union.

Yes, Lincolns main goal was to save the Union, but this doesn't take away his desire to free people not enslave them. Lincoln was in a difficult situation politically at the time and he knew that his first duty as president was to uphold the constitution and preserve the Union. Nevertheless, he already had completed a draft of the Emancipation Proclamation at the time of his letter to Greeley and was only waiting for a stronger political position following a Union victory to announce it. In the long run, if the Union had lost the war, abolishing slavery would have been impossible.

Lincoln was not trying to impose upon the United States a unatural and brutal system such as Communism funded by foriegn sources. He also didn't have people murdered that opposed him.

[Anonymous]

Let's take a look at the person that you chose for you're source, that of Robert McNamara.

He has a political agenda stated in the introduction of his book Argument Without End. His goal was to convince Americans that the Vietnam war was a mistake based on mutual misunderstanding and for the United States to give up on its power-political realism in favor of a utopian idealism such as the "United Nations". Wow, that would be effective!

In addition, since the Vietam War, McNamara has attempted to befriend those on the left that once despised him, as well as Communist enemies of the United States. He did so by visiting and consorting with Gorbachev in Moscow in 1986 and Fidel Castro in Havana in 1992.

In addition, while visiting Vietnam, I found McNamaras book prominantly displayed like some kind of idol in a musem display case.

Citing McNamara tells more about the person citing him than it does about McNamara.

[Anonymous]

“Foreign Sources???”

Isn’t United States considered a foreign source in Vietnam?
Isn’t the French foreign in Vietnam?
Isn’t the British foreign in Vietnam?

If your argument about foreign sources getting in the way of a country is true then….Vietnam should be left alone.

The Chinese or the Soviet shouldn’t be there.
Nor the Americans, the French, or the British.

Vietnam should have been left alone after WWII. It was a pathetic attempt by the French to save their colonial empire and United State got involved.

[Anonymous]

- And, all those reasons that you have listed on Lincoln prove my point that a duty of the country’s leader in time of crisis is to “Preserve the Union.” And, Ho was trying to do that…

- Just imagine if there were outside foreign sources meddling in United States policies… the citizens of this country will be just outrage. U.S. (and, other countries) should stay out of internal politics of other counties.

- Oh by the way, United Nations is largely funded by the United States. It is based in the United States. So… you are saying we should fund an organization, support it, BUT WE SHOULDN’T BELIEVE IN IT’S VALUES OR GOALS…..
yup, there is that American Credibility.....

[Anonymous]

On the subject of the Domino Theory and credibility.

During the Cold War, the United States functioned through a policy of containment of the Soviet Union and did so through deterrence of Communist expansion and aggression. In order to be successful in deterrence, the United States had to demonstrate its military and political will to deter its enemies along with reassuring its allies.

President Johnson made a speech on April 7, 1965 where he stated in regards to Indochina and the necessity of reasuring American allies, "Around the globe, from Berlin to Thailand, are people whose well being rests, in part, on the belief that they can count on us if they are attacked. To leave Vietnam to its fate would shake the confidence of all these people in the value of America's commitment, the value of America's word."

In trying to discourage Americas enemies, he stated, "The central lesson of our time is that the appetite of aggression is never satisfied. To withdraw from one battlefield means only to prepare for the next. We must say in Southeast Asia, as we did in Europe, in the words of the Bible ; 'Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further.'"

In listing U.S. policy aims in Indochina, President Johnson's advisor John McNaughton on March 25, 1965 listed 70% of that aim as avoiding a humiliating defeat as related to our reputation as a guarantor.

It's in this context that the Domino Theory applies.

[Anonymous]

This is in response to what would be considered war reparations and public apology (vortiz's)

I agree with you in wondering why descendents of slave should not receive some kind of reparations. If you examine our society today, it's set up so that African-Americans have very little chance of succeeding. Take a look at the numbers of black students represented in honors & drwc classes. Take a look at the numbers of blacks in prison. I know people who still have qualms about safety when they are alone at night and there's a group of African-Americans around. It's sad, and I can never fully understand how it feels to grow up black and underrepresented in the States. We really need to come up with programs to help African-Americans, especially in urban areas, come up and have an equal-as-possible chance to succeed without feeling like they're being targeted by the system and the man.

In response to public apology; it's so the world can forgive a country or a leader. Whether it's sincere or not, we really do not know, and does it really matter? What matters is that there are actions following the apology. Actions speak louder than words. When a leader cares enough to help out the victims, then it shows that they are trying to turn things around.

How good can a reparation be? The casinos and reservations for idigenous peoples of america is a joke. C'mon, everybody knows that the profit does not wholly go to the reservation. And how great is it when you have a whole bunch of strangers going onto your land so they can gamble? Do indigenous groups really want people to think of them in terms of casinos?

But then again, American would have a lot of reparations to take care of. It seems that there are many people who have been victims. The best way is to change the present in order to have a better future.

[Anonymous]

On the topic of foreign sources.

If you're going to reply to my posts, it would be good if you would read them thoroughly first. What I described was the concept that Abraham Lincoln was not forcing upon people an unatural and brutal system such as Communism, where Ho Chi Minh was. The system that Ho Chi Minh was forcing upon people was heavily supported from China and the Soviet Union which were enemies of the United States, right at the time when the United States was trying to contain Communism and prove its will or credibility to do so.

Yes, the United States, supported France, they were fighting Communists.

[Anonymous]

I once saw an original poster of the emancipation proclamation. This revered document was given a new light when I clearly read at the bottom that it applied only to those slaves in areas under rebellion.

The notion that the emancipation proclimation freed the slaves is false. It freed all southern salves. Those slaves who found themselves with their masters in loyal union states--be they border or not, and whose masters had not rebelled against the nation were still in fact slaves after the release of the emncipation. It is the thirteenth amendment that eliminates bondage in this nation. While I am sure Lincoln was a champion for freedom, I believe he may have never issued his edict had the Southerners capitulated earlier. This is supposition on my part. But I believe that likening Ho Chi Mihn to a murderous, foreign puppet is a bit harsh. Was Washington a puppet of the French? I believe he like Lincoln wanted to see his people united as one nation. He saw in Communism the answers to the repressive nature of French colonialism; his method for attaining his goal may have been unorthodox--but as Yap's defenese against invading Chinese in the late 70's showed the Vietnamese were out to improve themselves by there own devices. Ho Chi Mihn, Fidel Castro, and Daniel Noriega were beleviers in the gospel of Communism--they saw power in the blending of Communist utopian ideals and local nationalitic desires. Their means were unorthodox, more often than not disturbing, and out of line with wahat lets say Ghandi would do--but they were no Mao, Stalin, Chauchescu, Ida Amien. Let us not forget our murderous American cronies such as Trujillo, Pinochet, Batista, Duvalier, Charles Taylor, Sadam Hussein--yes he fought Iran for us in the early 80's...I was only a kid, but I remember, and last but not least our favorite, fully funded memeber of the Mujahadeen Osama Bin Laden.

The former group of dictators are believers whose practice of communism was seen as a means to nationalistic ends, yet the latter are all US sponsored butchers of the first order. [Edit by="chellmold on Jul 29, 9:54:28 PM"][/Edit]
[Edit by="chellmold on Jul 29, 10:49:42 PM"][/Edit]
[Edit by="chellmold on Jul 29, 10:54:08 PM"][/Edit]

[Anonymous]

“During the Cold War, the United States functioned through a policy of containment of the Soviet Union and did so through deterrence of Communist expansion and aggression. In order to be successful in deterrence, the United States had to demonstrate its military and political will to deter its enemies along with reassuring its allies.”

So, US had to demonstrate its military and political will to deter its enemies along with reassuring its allies….. so, Vietnam War had nothing to do with the fate and future of the Vietnamese people…

Yup, there is that American Credibility again (We were acting in our own self interest!)

[Anonymous]

“Abraham Lincoln was not forcing upon people an unatural and brutal system such as Communism, where Ho Chi Minh was.”

--The 1954 Geneva Accords required that a national election would be held in 1956 to reunite Vietnam under one government. The government of South Vietnam, now under the leadership of Ngo Dinh Diem and supported by the United States, refused to hold the stipulated elections.

Ho (who forced unnatural and brutal system) wanted to hold an election but US and it’s puppet government don’t

”Yes, the United States, supported France, they were fighting Communists.”

The French were trying to hold on to their colonies…They supported their puppet Emperor…

[Anonymous]

You just don't get it do you!?

You seem to seriously lack knowledge of what Communism is all about and how it is implemented and enforced. You have fallen for the most obvious and most rediculous Communist Propaganda, that of Communist countries calling themselves democratic.

The Geneva Accords were not treaties, and its final resolution was not signed by South Vietnam or the United States. In addition, the South Vietnamese government that was recognized by several countries was not bound to an election resulting from a resolution that it did not sign and could not win since North Vietnam had a larger population and would not hold free elections due to the fact that it was controlled by communists and therefore, anything but free.

Using the word democracy as part of the name of a Communist country was a farce. Remember East Germany, the GDR (German Democratic Republic). It had such free elections and such a wonderful society that they had to erect the Iron Curtain and Berlin Wall to keep people in. Even with all this, they had to shoot and kill people to keep them in.

Of course the United States foriegn policy promotes its self interest, that's what it's supposed to do. It also has ideals of freedom that it encourages. In the Post World War Two world, the best way to bring about freedom was to contain and then defeat the Soviet Union and its Communist ideology. This was in the interest of the United States, as it should be.

[Anonymous]

On the business of calling the South Vietnamese government the puppet of the U.S. and France.

If your'e going to call the South Vietnamese government a puppet of the U.S., then you have to do the same for Ho Chi Minh who was supplied heavily from China and the Soviet Union. They were supporting him from the very begining, economically and militarily. I found this even in the equipment used against the French at Dien Bien Phu when I traveled to Vietnam and Dien Bien Phu. The Viet Minh used to great effect, American artillery pieces. They can be seen on display in their battlefield museum. Where did they come from? They came by way of the Chinese and were captured during the Korean War. Included in this were Soviet Trucks and the rest of the weapons as well. Ho Chi Minh would have never been sucessful without these supplies. While travelling to Hanoi and Moscow, I found a bizarre example of Ho chi Minh's and his followers dedication to Marxist/Leninist ideology. Ho Chi Minhs body is preserved and displayed in Hanoi in the same style as Lenin's in Moscow. For a Communist or Communist sypathizer, this would be the highlight of the trip. OOH! AHH!

Overall, The reason that Vietnam was important to the U.S. was because it was important to China and the Soviet Union.

[Anonymous]

Regarding the Emancipation Proclamation.

Come on, don't be naive. The Union was fighting the states in rebellion. Some border states that had slaves had not joined the Confederacy. Would you rather it have been that they did, causing the Union to lose the war and ensuring the continuation of slavery in all slave states.

Again how Naive. "Likening Ho Chi Minh to a murderous foreign puppet is a bit harsh"? Don't be a dupe to Communist propaganda.

And again, Fidel Castro, who was responsible for sending Communist revolutionaries all around the world.

Our goal during the Cold War was to contain and defeat The Soviet Union and its Communism. For most of the twentieth century, for the United States to conduct a foreign policy that went beyond the confines of North America or Western Europe, would require of the United States to form alliances with military dictators, even Stalin himself during World War Two in order to defeat Hitler who was the greater threat at that time.

Taking a look at the post Vietnam period of the mid 70s, out of 144 United Nations member states, only about two dozen could be called democracies.

[Anonymous]

About Studying.

Yes, read and study and watch documentaries, but do so carefully. Question the source for agendas and bias. Is the author a radical? What is their world view? Are they contemptuous of America and scornful of its military and their mission? Do they refuse to give America the benefit of the doubt and then lend their ear to its enemies?

First thing to be learned in college. Always question your professors. They are known for their radicalism and I have had several that were admitted Communists and almost all of them were at least anti American.

[Anonymous]

Swaller I am assuming that you think that people like ronald reagan, richard nixon, george bush 1 and 2, lyndon johnson, kissinger etc etc were great people who really cared about people of the world. ask most people in the third world and they will tell you that the U.S. never goes into another country to free people. the u.s. is an imperialist beast that is responsible for so much destruction, murder and ending anytype of possibilities for the development of countries that treat their people like human beings. instead the u.s. promotes dictatorships, wars overthrows good leaders and revolutions all in the name of profit and world domination, monopoly capitalism , imperialism ,globalization call it what you like. ask the people in central america what they think of ronald reagan, ask the people of africa what they think of richard nixon, ask the poeople of south america what they think of henry kissinger or eisenhower or george bush 1. remember panama, chile, angola, somalia, laos, cambodia, indonesia, the congo, guatemala, iraq, argentina, vietnam, el salvador, haiti, south africa etc etcc the list goes on and on. their is to much ignorance and first world chauvinism and rightwing nonsense spewing that it is impossible to respond to everything you have said. I honestly hope you take time to learn and study and hopefully remove some of the ignorance you recieved or were fed some where.

[Author]

Posts