Cicero. What is your point? That coups occurred in S Vietnam???
Look at the history of the 50's, 60's & 70's. Coups occurred in these countries, some multiple times: Brazil, Turkey, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Afganistán, Algeria, Bolivia, Cambodia, Haiti Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Panama, Pakistan, Peru, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Uganda, Yemen... This is just a partial list.
Is your point that a leader installed by a coup is somehow Pro or Anti American? Much of the leaders of the world were (and are) in power by coup or similar 'non elected' procedure. The coup ousting Diem was a popular coup, supported by the majority of the S Vietnamese people. Many of the rest were for political expediency. Are you so naive to think that governments of the world, even today, are all 'democratically elected by the masses"???
My point is, you and joey claim that it wasn't an invasion. Which South Vietnamese government INVITED U.S. military intervention, and was it supported by it's people? I know you want to claim the roll of a liberating force in S. Vietnam, but at the end of the day, much of what the US did was suppress political opposition against the South's pro American leaders. According to WIKI, the Phoenix Project was: The Program was designed to identify and "neutralize" (via infiltration, capture, terrorism, torture, and assassination) the infrastructure of the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam (NLF or Viet Cong). The CIA described it as "a set of programs that sought to attack and destroy the political infrastructure of the Viet Cong".
My claim was that you were fighting in support of an illegitimate government led by coups and not public support. So I ask again, WHO invited the US military invasion into South Vietnam?
If you read history, I'm sure you will find that Diem was overthrown with popular support of the people of S Vietnam. The Buddhists led an uprising against Diem that increasingly gained support and led to the military coup. Take a look around the world today and you'll see similar events. I'm sorry that how governments are chosen does not meet your standard, but that is how it is in the "real world" (as opposed to Cicero's Utopian World).
Cissy is still, yes STILL trying to justify his false version of what an "INVASION" means. Like a dog with a bone... he can't let go!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
There you go again, deflecting attention from your false claims and redirecting them into something else false...US INVADING VIETNAM!!! Exactly what I expect from someone that talks out their blowhole more than anyone on this forum.
Not deflecting...WHO INVITED THE US MILITARY INTO SOUTH VIETNAM? WAS IT A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT REPRESENTING THE VIETNAMESE PEOPLE?
My point is, you and joey claim that it wasn't an invasion. Which South Vietnamese government INVITED U.S. military intervention, and was it supported by it's people? I know you want to claim the roll of a liberating force in S. Vietnam, but at the end of the day, much of what the US did was suppress political opposition against the South's pro American leaders. According to WIKI, the Phoenix Project was: The Program was designed to identify and "neutralize" (via infiltration, capture, terrorism, torture, and assassination) the infrastructure of the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam (NLF or Viet Cong). The CIA described it as "a set of programs that sought to attack and destroy the political infrastructure of the Viet Cong".
See some good did come of Cicero's mistaken INVASION of S Vietnam. CICERO IS ACTUALLY READING HISTORY, INSTEAD OF MAKING IT UP TO FIT HIS AGENDA!!! He's still wrong of course, but at least he is looking for facts, not inventing them.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Not deflecting...WHO INVITED THE US MILITARY INTO SOUTH VIETNAM? WAS IT A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT REPRESENTING THE VIETNAMESE PEOPLE?
YES
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If you read history, I'm sure you will find that Diem was overthrown with popular support of the people of S Vietnam. The Buddhists led an uprising against Diem that increasingly gained support and led to the military coup.
At the end of the day, the popular support was apparently the NLF.
See some good did come of Cicero's mistaken INVASION of S Vietnam. CICERO IS ACTUALLY READING HISTORY, INSTEAD OF MAKING IT UP TO FIT HIS AGENDA!!! He's still wrong of course, but at least he is looking for facts, not inventing them.
Yes, the U.S. was actively suppressing political opposition.
I know you want to claim the roll of a liberating force in S. Vietnam, but at the end of the day, much of what the US did was suppress political opposition against the South's pro American leaders.
Liberation??? Cicero, look up the word "LIBERATION".
If the USA joined the Army of S Vietnam, against a foreign INVASION from the North... did they Liberate? Or did they help suppress an INVASION from N Vietnam?
Look up what happened when the north and south were partitioned. Why did millions of people leave their homes and move south.
Quoted Text
Operation Passage to Freedom was a term used by the United States Navy to describe its transportation in 1954–55 of 310,000 Vietnamese civilians, soldiers and non-Vietnamese members of the French Army from communist North Vietnam (the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) to South Vietnam (the State of Vietnam, later to become the Republic of Vietnam). The French military transported a further 500,000. Between 600,000 and one million northerners moved south, while between 14,000 and 45,000 civilians and approximately 100,000 Viet Minh fighters moved in the opposite direction.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
At the end of the day, the popular support was apparently the NLF.
Do you consider the movement of North Vietnamese troops INTO South Vietnam to be an INVASION??? Was the Government of N Vietnam ELECTED by it's people? Was it a LEGITIMATE government?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Not deflecting...WHO INVITED THE US MILITARY INTO SOUTH VIETNAM? WAS IT A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT REPRESENTING THE VIETNAMESE PEOPLE?
So, you are now admitting that your claim we INVADED Vietnam was a false statement and your claim of COUPS against the US was also a false statement....
Now you want to change directions since you were shown to be so wrong, to understanding who requested US participation in Vietnam. Why do you need us to give you that answer when you can search for it yourself? Why challenge us to support your claims? Why not show us proof to the contrary instead of asking others to answer your questions. Prove your points if you want to have a legitimate discussion instead of playing your stupid games.
HINT: It was a French colony; our initial involvement was advisory. Now see if you can figure it out!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Do you consider the movement of North Vietnamese troops INTO South Vietnam to be an INVASION??? Was the Government of N Vietnam ELECTED by it's people? Was it a LEGITIMATE government?
A violation of the Geneva Agreements.
Quoted Text
The Geneva Agreements, which were issued on July 21, 1954,[10] carefully worded the division of northern and southern Vietnam as a "provisional military demarcation line",[11] "on either side of which the forces of the two parties shall be regrouped after their withdrawal".[11] To specifically put aside any notion that it was a partition, they further stated, in the Final Declaration, Article 6: "The Conference recognizes that the essential purpose of the agreement relating to Vietnam is to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and that the military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary" [11]
Quoted from Box A Rox Do you consider the movement of North Vietnamese troops INTO South Vietnam to be an INVASION??? Was the Government of N Vietnam ELECTED by it's people? Was it a LEGITIMATE government?
You didn't answer the question. Quoted from Box A Rox 1 Do you consider the movement of North Vietnamese troops INTO South Vietnam to be an INVASION??? 2Was the Government of N Vietnam ELECTED by it's people? 3 Was it a LEGITIMATE government?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Quoted from Box A Rox Do you consider the movement of North Vietnamese troops INTO South Vietnam to be an INVASION??? Was the Government of N Vietnam ELECTED by it's people? Was it a LEGITIMATE government?
You didn't answer the question. Quoted from Box A Rox 1 Do you consider the movement of North Vietnamese troops INTO South Vietnam to be an INVASION??? 2Was the Government of N Vietnam ELECTED by it's people? 3 Was it a LEGITIMATE government?
Your straw man doesn't matter, we are talking about US Military involvement as liberator or imperial invader. What was the US purpose, what would have been victory?
What the Americans call the Vietnam War the Vietnamese call the American War. First they kicked out the French colonialist, then the American imperialists.
Your straw man doesn't matter, we are talking about US Military involvement as liberator or imperial invader. What was the US purpose, what would have been victory?
It's YOUR contention that the USA was in S Vietnam as "LIBERATORS" not mine. It's YOUR contention that the USA was in S Vietnam as "Imperial Invaders" not mine. The Purpose: The US Stated purpose in S Vietnam was to help the ARVN to resist incursion of N Vietnamese troops into S Vietnam. Victory: Would consist of a stable S Vietnam with it's borders secured from foreign military incursions.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
What the Americans call the Vietnam War the Vietnamese call the American War.
Okay, another claim I've never read, so I am interested on where you came up with the claim of what the Vietnamese called it. And let's be specific here, verifiable source and said by whom in what context.
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Logged
