Gen. Vo Gnuyen Giap, NVA dies
brinktk
Active member
No matter what one may think of this man, respect must be given. Although he may have been an adversary of the US at one time, I give nothing but respect to this most worthy of adversaries. If only we could have worked together for peace instead of in opposition...
Rest in peace sir, you've served your time in hell.
Rest in peace sir, you've served your time in hell.
Giap
I recall the Paris Peace talks. We tried to exit with peace. A few weeks later they stormed across the DMZ and finished off a weaker South Vietnam. Nixon was under to much pressure at home and needed to due something so he signed the peace accords. Note: Giap needlessly sacrificed NVA troops at a rate that was often 5 or 6 to 1 to try and accomplish an objective Hue, Khe Sanh. and so on. I would say he was very persistent but not an excellent strategist.
I recall the Paris Peace talks. We tried to exit with peace. A few weeks later they stormed across the DMZ and finished off a weaker South Vietnam. Nixon was under to much pressure at home and needed to due something so he signed the peace accords. Note: Giap needlessly sacrificed NVA troops at a rate that was often 5 or 6 to 1 to try and accomplish an objective Hue, Khe Sanh. and so on. I would say he was very persistent but not an excellent strategist.
brinktk
Active member
The peace talks occurred at the end of 72 into 73. The PAVN offensive to take out south Vietnam didn't occur until 75 with it culminating in Saigon falling in April of that year. He fought off three major powers...every major battle fought in Vietnam was fought on the communist terms. He dictated the casualties by giving battle only when he wanted which meant even if he lost 10 soldiers to our 1...he could do it forever...we aren't willing to take those casualties...I would equate him to George Washington. Lost more battles than he won, but the ones he won counted, and he had the charisma to keep his army in the field for 30 years.
Last edited:
We could have worked for peace
During WW2 Vietnamese Guerrilla's fought Japan and were supplied by the USA. At that time they looked at us as an ally and fully expected to have their contribution rewarded with independence.
We turned our back and allowed France to retake Indochina. Then ~ 20 years later due to Communist domino concern we are at odds with the NVA and Viet Cong.
I remember Ho Chi Minh saying something to the effect that he would win regardless of the numbers or length of time it took to do so. Perhaps Giap was just the implementer of this policy?
An important difference between the NV and George Washington. Washington had no intention of creating a dictatorship - government of the few. It was offered to him and he turned it down.
During WW2 Vietnamese Guerrilla's fought Japan and were supplied by the USA. At that time they looked at us as an ally and fully expected to have their contribution rewarded with independence.
We turned our back and allowed France to retake Indochina. Then ~ 20 years later due to Communist domino concern we are at odds with the NVA and Viet Cong.
I remember Ho Chi Minh saying something to the effect that he would win regardless of the numbers or length of time it took to do so. Perhaps Giap was just the implementer of this policy?
An important difference between the NV and George Washington. Washington had no intention of creating a dictatorship - government of the few. It was offered to him and he turned it down.
Last edited:
brinktk
Active member
The actual constitution that Ho Chi Minh created was modeled directly after our own. That war was not about communism vs democracy. It was a civil war of reunification because the south reneged in 1957 after the general election to determine the fate of the whole country had ho chi Minh winning that election. He tried the democratic way...didn't work out so he used military action to achieve that end. We did the same to preserve our union during the civil war...if you remember our history it took us over 100 years to get everybody on board with the whole democracy thing after the civil war. History gives me the perspective that over a long enough timeline we all become hypocrites...so let's reserve judgement for the historians.
Last edited:
So your saying they weren't communist when they fought the French? That I didn't know. I thought that was a reason we supported France in the 1st so called Indochina war. Perhaps I'm mistaken on this?
Also regarding our democracy are you referring to the civil rights movement that helped provide voting rights for the African Americans in the South? Although I can't quite compare the misgiving of America's democracy " of which their are some even now" with that of a communist Oligarchy - Dictatorship. I've meet many people who braved their life to escape Vietnam.
Also regarding our democracy are you referring to the civil rights movement that helped provide voting rights for the African Americans in the South? Although I can't quite compare the misgiving of America's democracy " of which their are some even now" with that of a communist Oligarchy - Dictatorship. I've meet many people who braved their life to escape Vietnam.
Last edited:
brinktk
Active member
Yes, they were communist. At least the Viet Minh were. When they were fighting the French there wasn't a Vietnam, just Indo China which included present Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. That war was fought over France wanting their colony back after WWII with multiple factions fighting for and against the French. Anyways, no one is denying the NVA did some crappy stuff, but so did the south Vietnamese government. To the average Vietnamese, political ideology came a distant second to unifying the country.
As for us, I was referring to the blacks still being treated essentially as slaves and being institutionally forbidden from participating in the democratic process, openly treated as non citizens, and the use of murder or assault to ensure they were kept in line. Not to mention the whole sale slaughter of the Native American population. Or the indentured servitude that immigrants often found themselves in when they came to America because they had no idea the terms of their "contract".
As for talking of the Vietnamese who came to the states under the circumstances you provide, I believe it, it mirrors the same thing my wife's family talks of (they're from Laos). But that isn't exclusive to communists. Civil wars tend to be particularly bloody and whoever wins is going to move to reinforce their power after that victory. That's how they stay in power. Almost every violent change of government in history had a bloody consolidation afterwards....so it isn't difficult to see how that all could happen in Vietnam. The point of this being the Vietnamese situation, tactics, re education, and reforms were not unique when compared to the vastness of history.
As for us, I was referring to the blacks still being treated essentially as slaves and being institutionally forbidden from participating in the democratic process, openly treated as non citizens, and the use of murder or assault to ensure they were kept in line. Not to mention the whole sale slaughter of the Native American population. Or the indentured servitude that immigrants often found themselves in when they came to America because they had no idea the terms of their "contract".
As for talking of the Vietnamese who came to the states under the circumstances you provide, I believe it, it mirrors the same thing my wife's family talks of (they're from Laos). But that isn't exclusive to communists. Civil wars tend to be particularly bloody and whoever wins is going to move to reinforce their power after that victory. That's how they stay in power. Almost every violent change of government in history had a bloody consolidation afterwards....so it isn't difficult to see how that all could happen in Vietnam. The point of this being the Vietnamese situation, tactics, re education, and reforms were not unique when compared to the vastness of history.
Response
I do tend to think the communist have shown some of the more extreme cases of brutality. One only has to look Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot to see some of histories worse offenders. Some none communist are up there as well Hitler, Imperial Japan, the Congo Free State
I do tend to think the communist have shown some of the more extreme cases of brutality. One only has to look Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot to see some of histories worse offenders. Some none communist are up there as well Hitler, Imperial Japan, the Congo Free State
I do tend to think the communist have shown some of the more extreme cases of brutality. One only has to look Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot to see some of histories worse offenders. Some none communist are up there as well Hitler, Imperial Japan, and the Congo Free State. However whether it 10’s of thousands or 10’s of millions it’s a tragedy either way.
misc
I sometimes wonder if the US isn't a bit of an oligarchy with certain well to do folks having more influence than an average voter. But at least it's better than some with no representative for the individual.
The US was shameful with our treatment of the Native Americans and people of color. Britain, France, Holland also with their treatment of people in their colonial empires. Were - are very poor treatment of one group of people by another. I have seen this improve in the US in my lifetime.
Hitler praised both the US and Britain for the handling of native peoples. A difference was he wanted to create his colonies in Eastern Europe, which was a bit of a no-no since this was part of the civilized continent.
When I was in the service in the late 70's we were trained to hate the communist.
I sometimes wonder if the US isn't a bit of an oligarchy with certain well to do folks having more influence than an average voter. But at least it's better than some with no representative for the individual.
The US was shameful with our treatment of the Native Americans and people of color. Britain, France, Holland also with their treatment of people in their colonial empires. Were - are very poor treatment of one group of people by another. I have seen this improve in the US in my lifetime.
Hitler praised both the US and Britain for the handling of native peoples. A difference was he wanted to create his colonies in Eastern Europe, which was a bit of a no-no since this was part of the civilized continent.
When I was in the service in the late 70's we were trained to hate the communist.