Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    can.general    |    General Canuck chatter    |    162,586 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 160,610 of 162,586    |
|    Optimus Prime to Dave Smith    |
|    Re: PBS's The Vietnam War: Ken Burns' Do    |
|    18 Sep 17 09:02:53    |
      XPost: can.politics       From: trans@for.mer              On 9/18/2017 6:50 AM, Dave Smith wrote:       > On 2017-09-17 11:06 PM, Liberals are VERMIN! wrote:       >> On Sunday, 17 September 2017 21:19:54 UTC-4, AlleyCat wrote:       >       >>> Who is to blame for the Vietnam war?       >>>       >>> FRANCE!       >>>       >>> The basic answer is that the U.S. was asked by France, via NATO,       >>> to keep the communists from "taking over" the French Territory. We       >>> sent troops over only to advise, and from there WE were in it and       >>> it just went "to hell in a hand-basket".       >>>       >>> France had attempted to regain control of its Southeast Asian       >>> colonies (including Vietnam) after WWII in 1945. They were fighting       >>> Ho Chi Minh and his communist rebels. Starting in 1950, the U.S.       >>> started to send military aid to France to help in its effort       >>> against the Viet Minh (the communist rebels). This was part of the       >>> U.S. goal of "containment" of the spread of communism.       >>       >> France was broke and communists within the French government caused       >> France to let its own men die at Dien Bien Phu. The Americans should       >> have nuked the Viet troop emplacements prior to that, like was       >> partially-planned and there would have been no Vietnam war.       >>       >       >       > A lot of the trouble could have been avoided if they had simply granted       > Vietnam independence instead of giving it back to France after       > liberating it from the Japanese, who had previously liberated it from       > France.              Fwonce having had such a spectacular success record at turning back       commies, right???                     > Or.... the Americans could have provided the requested air       > support at Bien Diem Phu.              Iow do what the US has _always_ had to do - carry the froggies water       when they botch a perfectly winnable engagement?              Beter read some history, you big dumb, America-hating, trucker bully:              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dien_Bien_Phu              According to the Mutual Defense Assistance Act, the United States       provided the French with material aid during the battle – aircraft       (supplied by the USS Saipan), weapons, mechanics, 24 CIA/CAT pilots, and       U.S. Air Force maintenance crews.[83] The United States, however,       intentionally avoided overt direct intervention. In February 1954,       following the French occupation of Điện Biên Phủ but before the battle,       Democratic senator Michael Mansfield asked the United States Defense       Secretary, Charles Erwin Wilson, whether the United States would send       naval or air units if the French were subjected to greater pressure       there, but Wilson replied that "for the moment there is no justification       for raising United States aid above its present level". President Dwight       D. Eisenhower also stated, "Nobody is more opposed to intervention than       I am".[83] On 31 March, following the fall of "Beatrice", "Gabrielle",       and "Anne-Marie", a panel of U.S. Senators and House Representatives       questioned the American Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral       Arthur W. Radford, about the possibility of American involvement.       Radford concluded it was too late for the U.S. Air Force to save the       French garrison. A proposal for direct intervention was unanimously       voted down by the committee, which "concluded that intervention was a       positive act of war".[84]              The United States did covertly participate in the battle. Following a       request for help from Henri Navarre, Radford provided two squadrons of       B-26 Invader bomber aircraft to support the French. Following this, 37       American transport pilots flew 682 sorties over the course of the       battle.[85] Earlier, in order to succeed the pre-Điện Biên Phủ Operation       Castor of November 1953, General Chester McCarty made available 12       additional C-119 Flying Boxcars flown by French crews.[85]              Two of the American pilots, James McGovern, Jr., and Wallace Buford,       were killed in action during the siege of Điện Biên Phủ.[86] On 25       February 2005, the seven still living American pilots were awarded the       French Legion of Honor by Jean-David Levitte, the French ambassador to       the United States.[85] The role that the American pilots played in this       battle had remained little known until 2004. The American historian Erik       Kirsinger researched the case for more than a year to establish the       facts.[87][88]              The French author Jules Roy suggests that Admiral Radford discussed with       the French the possibility of using nuclear weapons in support of the       French garrison.[89] Moreover, John Foster Dulles reportedly mentioned       the possibility of lending atomic bombs to the French for use at Điện       Biên Phủ,[90] and a similar source claims that the British Foreign       Secretary Sir Anthony Eden was aware of the possibility of the use of       nuclear weapons in that region.[91]              > The US could have avoided its prolonged involvement if they had truly       > wanted to have a democratic solution.              It wasn't OUR democracy, you oaf!              We were actually trying NOT to be nation-builders, something you gutless       Canuck pukes regularly revile us for, ya raving Goddamned hypocrite!              > The leadership in the south was       > notoriously corrupt.              And the commies in the north were saints?              > The agreement to end the initial conflict was to       > divide the country in two and then to later hold vote on reunification.       > The government of the south realized that they were going to lose the       > vote so they refused to hold re referendum, and did so with the full       > support of the US.              B oo fucking hoo!              You wanted us to rip in in half and set up a DMZ like in Korea?              Well, is that what ya wanted ya big dumb hypocrite?              Why didn't your pissant coward nation do jack diddly?              > We were let to believe that the US was there to protect democracy ins       > South Vietnam, but it was actually quite the opposite, a ten year with       > hundreds of thousands of deaths in an effort to prevent the vote that       > would not favour the US.              You Canuckleheads are always "led to believe" bullshit b y your hard       left disinformation media machine.              You're:              ~ stupid              ~ easily herded              ~ cowardly on the world stage              ~ endlessly critical of everyone but yourselves              ~ whiny little bitches who never take a stand and revile those who do              In short, Canuckleheads are useless eaters, by the classic definition.              No go watch a hockey game, ya besotted bitcher.              You make real men want to puke.              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca