Fews Myth For My Friends...., enjoy your ... Options

[Thay_]

Here is something to keep "you" busy.

Myth #1: The United States was defeated militarily in Southeast Asia.

"Needless deaths: General Curtis LeMay, chief of staff of the U.S. Air Force, stated in 1968: "The only reason American soldiers are bleeding and dying in Vietnam today is because our leaders have tied their hands behind their backs."

Response: This, one of the most persistent and widely believed falsehoods, is refuted by overwhelming evidence and unimpeachable authorities. Virtually all military experts agree that America was never militarily defeated in Vietnam; we "lost" the war because of unconscionable political decisions that tied the hands of our fighting forces and prevented them from winning..."


Myth #3: The North Vietnamese (Communists) won, ultimately, because they occupied the moral high ground. They were fighting for their homeland against a foreign invader.

"Glorified tyrant: Promoted by the liberal-left in America as an ardent nationalist and freedom fighter, Ho Chi Minh was, in reality, a lifelong Communist and mass-murderer.

Response: There was no triumph for the Vietnamese "people" in the U.S. abandonment of Vietnam. A dark shadow of death soon descended on Southeast Asia and Communist auto-genocide (or "democide," to use the term coined by Professor R.J. Rummel) wiped out millions of lives in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia and caused recurring floods of refugees not seen since the times of the Mongol invasions..."

Myth # 7: All of America's POWs were returned following the 1973 peace agreement, and Vietnam is now cooperating to find the remains of all the unresolved MIAs.

"Response: President Clinton announced on February 3, 1994 that he was lifting the U.S. trade embargo on Vietnam, which had then been in effect for 19 years. He was "absolutely convinced," he said, that renewing economic relations with Vietnam is the best way to resolve the fates of the 2,238 U.S. servicemen still listed as missing in that war.(60) Seventy former U.S. POWs from the Vietnam War - including Representative Sam Johnson of Texas; Admiral James Stockdale, USN (Ret.); Brigadier General Robinson Risner, USAF (Ret.); and Captain Eugene "Red" McDaniel, USN (Ret.) - sent a letter to the president expressing their strong opposition to lifting the trade embargo against Hanoi. These former POWs urged Clinton "in the strongest possible terms, not to take further steps to restore economic or diplomatic relations with Hanoi until you certify that the Communist government there is fully forthcoming in telling us what they know about our fellow POWs and MIAs who did not make it home with us in 1973."(61)..."

Quoted from: http://www.jbs.org/visitor/focus/vietnam/no_win/7myths.htm

Here is some more

The 1968 Tet offensive was a total and complete miltary disaster for the North Vietnamese Communists no matter how you look at it. If you measure victory by territory gained or enemy killed, the North Vietnamese Army and the Viet Cong failed dismally in their attacks.
The NVA and VC had counted on a "People's Uprising" to carry them to victory, however there was no such uprising. They did exactly what the American military wanted them to do. They massed in large formations that were incredibly vulnerable to the awesome fire support the U.S. Military was able to bring to bear on them in a coordinated and devastating manner.
The NVA and VC attacked only ARVN installations with the exception of the US Embassy in Saigon. Despite reports to the contrary by all major television news networks and the print media, the VC sapper team of 15 men never entered the chancery building and all 15 VC were dead within 6 hours of the attack. They caused no damage to any property and managed to kill 4 US Army MPs, and one Marine guard. The South Vietnamese Police tasked with guarding the Embassy fled at the first sound of gunfire.

Source: http://www.rjsmith.com/war_myth.html

Do enjoy,
Thay___n

This post has been edited by Thay_: Apr 9 2004, 08:10 PM

[Nam Quoc Son Ha]

Muahahaha this post is to keep us busy? I think you underestimate Viets. Whatever the Americans write about it, I still think it was a Vietnamese victory.

[Byron]

Oh brother. I've read many American articles that said America lost the war and it was the first defeat in American's history.

Ok tell me did America achieve what they wanted in Vietnam? 58,000 American troops died for nothing. Sure Vietnamese lost more but at least they were victorious and gained the country.

Stupid Khmer and his crap country that can't fight for beans has to put other victorious countries down to make his people feel proud.

[Jayson]

Lol. A cambodian try'n to cheap'n the Vietnamese victory.

I do believe that The Americans could defeat us militarily. All they had to do is nuke us.

"Ho Chi Minh was, in reality, a lifelong Communist and mass-murderer."
I stop readin' after that since I find the artical to be B.S.

[angkorwat19]

Muahahaha this post is to keep us busy? I think you underestimate Viets. Whatever the Americans write about it, I still think it was a Vietnamese victory.

vietnamese lost more lives than americans. american only lost like 56,000 and viet lost over a million including civilians. no one really won that war.

[Byron]

Ok if you look at victory in war as fighting and taking over land then yes the U.S won.

But the NVA and Vietcong were fighting PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE, and they were the masters at it.

The TET OFFENSIVE WAS A FAILURE MILITARILY, but Psychologically it was a victory since it was the offensive that turned the tide to the Vietcong. Since the attacks at many major cities in South Vietnam was reported on the U.S news as a defeat for America causing many protesters.

Vietnam knew they couldn't defeat America militarily(how can they?, look at all the advance weapons they have) They were fighting them with PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE.

They were fighting a PEOPLE'S WAR, which is to wear down the U.S until they realize they can never win the war.

U.S thought they controlled the land, but the truth was they only controlled it during the day. During the night it was the VC who were controlling it since they easily sneaked through the land at night launching attacks.

[Nam Quoc Son Ha]

So what? Even if we'd lost 10 million, we would still be considered to victorious. Look at Vietnam, who's in power and who kicked American a$$es back to their country?

Here's a quote from Ho Chi Minh for you to digest:

"You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it"

[Jayson]

The Americans wern't fightin' alone. They had help from the South Vietnamese, South Koreans, Australians, Thais, Hmongs and who else am I missing?

[Byron]

Muahahaha this post is to keep us busy? I think you underestimate Viets. Whatever the Americans write about it, I still think it was a Vietnamese victory. 

vietnamese lost more lives than americans. american only lost like 56,000 and viet lost over a million including civilians. no one really won that war.

Since when did casuailties determined if you won or lost a war?

Victory depends on if you got what you were trying to acheive with the war.

NVA's goals: "To liberate South Vietnam and make the Amerians leave.

American's goals: "To protect South Vietnam from being taken over.

So who's military goal was achieved? It doesn't matter if the NVA and Vietcong lost more troops, in the end who's military goal was achieved? Thus it was a victory for the NVA and Vietcong and the first defeat for Amreica.(Well maybe except the war of 1812, but most Americans still believe Vietnam was their first defeat.

[angkorwat19]

So what? Even if we'd lost 10 million, we would still be considered to victorious. Look at Vietnam, who's in power and who kicked American a$$es back to their country?

Here's a quote from Ho Chi Minh for you to digest:

"You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it"

that's pretty damn scary that you would not care if 10 million viet lives were lost. fu-k that $hit. even if viets kicked american asses out of their country, NO ONE WON that war. damn these ho chi minh motherfu-kers. jayson and you have viet daddies and i wouldn't be surprised that your viet daddies taught you how to think like your predatory ancestors including ho chi minh.

[Byron]

So what? Even if we'd lost 10 million, we would still be considered to victorious. Look at Vietnam, who's in power and who kicked American a$$es back to their country?

Here's a quote from Ho Chi Minh for you to digest:

"You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it"

that's pretty damn scary that you would not care if 10 million viet lives were lost. fu-k that $hit. even if viets kicked american asses out of their country, NO ONE WON that war. damn these ho chi minh motherfu-kers. jayson and you have viet daddies and i wouldn't be surprised that your viet daddies taught you how to think like your predatory ancestors including ho chi minh.

I don't expect you to understand Ho Chi Minh's statement of 10 vietnamese killed for 1 American.

Unlike Cambodians, Vietnam would do anything for independence. They would rather all die with honor rather than serve someone else.

Which is why Cambodians were willing to kiss the French's @$$ as long as they don't get beaten up by the French, while Vietnamese were willing to die to free themselves from the French which is why it was the Vietnamese who defeated the French and booted them from Indochina, while the Cambodians would kiss anyone's @$$ as long as they don't get hurt by them.

So I don't expect you Cambodians to understand that we Vietnamese would rather have millions of us die for independance rather than be slaves. What's the point of living as a slave?

I would rather die free, than live as a slave. What meaning does life have at all if you can't have freedom from others?

This post has been edited by Byron: Apr 9 2004, 08:59 PM

[Jayson]

Americans killed more Vietnamese?... Yes, lets go shoot The Viet Congs, unarmed Civilians, Babies, Childrens, Old people, and also lets bomb everyone in the villiage so we can rack up the high death toll of Vietnamese people and declare it a military victory. Like this?

This post has been edited by Jayson: Apr 9 2004, 09:07 PM

[angkorwat19]

i don't recall many vietnamese being happy after the vietnam war. they really didn't consider it a victory. i watched the news about how vietnamese in vietnam felt about the war and most of them did not consider it a victory. many lives were lost, families being raped and killed during their trek to america and people still consider that city saigon not ho chi minh city.

[Byron]

i don't recall many vietnamese being happy after the vietnam war. they really didn't consider it a victory. i watched the news about how vietnamese in vietnam felt about the war and most of them did not consider it a victory. many lives were lost, families being raped and killed during their trek to america and people still consider that city saigon not ho chi minh city.

Those are mostly overseas Vietnamese. Most of them are from the defeated South Vietnam.

Ok it wasn't Vietnam vs. the U.S.

It was NORTH Vietnam vs. The U.S and South Vietnam.

Of course South Vietnamese in America are sad about the war the ylost.

Yes the Vietcong were mostly South Vietnamese, but the overseas Vietnamese are usually connected to the South Vietnamese regime which is why they fled.

The Americans were defeated with only half a country, not even all of Vietnam.

This post has been edited by Byron: Apr 9 2004, 09:09 PM

[Nam Quoc Son Ha]

Here's a quote from one of our Vietnamese ancestors Tran Binh Trong: "Tha lam quy dat nam chu khong lam vuong dat bac"

here's the translation:

"Rather be the ghost of the southern land than the prince of the northern land"

Referring to Vietnam and China of course. Tran Binh Trong was captured by the Chinese for his independence struggle. When the Chinese tried to bribe him and make him a Chinese mandarin, he uttered such words and later beheaded. Now give me an example of a Cambodian person showing such courage.

[RockHeart]

You VC will be surprise to see the second American War + KhmerKrom + Cambodian + another three countries joint with Khmers!! to destroy you all VC . By that time, you all VC have no place to go...You all VC will be Crack and damage by American massive bomb explode!! . You all VC don't even have a DogMeat to carry with!!! The second American War will come soon!!! Your VC ha noi will be mile become an ocean!!! . RockHeart will catch DAI VIET for Asking series question!! You don't be "Jerk" on me...

RockHeart.
:genius:

[Nam Quoc Son Ha]

Are you F*CKING live in fantasy land?

[Byron]

You VC will be surprise to see the second American War + KhmerKrom + Cambodian + another three countries joint with Khmers!! to destroy you all VC . By that time, you all VC have no place to go...You all VC will be Crack and damage by American massive bomb explode!!   . You all VC don't even have a DogMeat to carry with!!! The second American War will come soon!!! Your VC ha noi will be mile become an ocean!!! . RockHeart will catch DAI VIET for Asking series question!! You don't be "Jerk" on me...

RockHeart.
:genius:

HA HA HA HA HA YOUR SUCH A JOKER.

Yes the U.S would join and lose American lives for a bunch of poor people who can't contribute anything to them.

Unless you have something like oil like Kuwait did when they liberated them, then America wouldn't risk American lives help you against us.

LOL AMERICA DOESN'T CARE FOR YOU UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING THEY WANT. WHY DO YOU THINK THEY DIDN'T HELP HO CHI MINH AGAINST THE FRENCH AND HE HAD TO TURN TO THE COMMUNISTS TO DO IT?

America only aided South Vietnam because they didn't want communism to spread.

America is more closer to Vietnam than they are to Cambodia.

This post has been edited by Byron: Apr 9 2004, 09:15 PM

[angkorwat19]

Here's a quote from one of our Vietnamese ancestors Tran Binh Trong: "Tha lam quy dat nam chu khong lam vuong dat bac"

here's the translation:

"Rather be the ghost of the southern land than the prince of the northern land"

Referring to Vietnam and China of course. Tran Binh Trong was captured by the Chinese for his independence struggle. When the Chinese tried to bribe him and make him a Chinese mandarin, he uttered such words and later beheaded. Now give me an example of a Cambodian person showing such courage.

that's an easy one.

The first Khmer kingdom, known as Chenla, adopted the entire culture of Funan for itself. Chenla did not have a strong government, though; it prospered in the 7th century, but in 706 it split into two states, known as "Land Chenla" (Laos) and "Water Chenla" (Cambodia). Land Chenla retained some measure of unity, but constant intrigues for the throne shattered Water Chenla into no less than five smaller states. At the end of the 8th century all of Water Chenla came under the domination of one of Java's Sailendra monarchs.
The incident that caused the Javan conquest also started the Khmers on the road to greatness. It involved a rash young king, whose name we do not know. According to the Arab traveler who provided this account, one day the young king and his prime minister were discussing what to do about Java, the strongest naval power in the region. The king said, "I have one desire I would like to satisfy."
"What is this desire, O King?" his councilor asked.
"I want to see before me on a plate the head of the king of Java."

When the king of Java heard about the Khmer monarch's wish, he led a fleet of a thousand ships up the Mekong River and routed the Khmers defending the capital. Capturing the young king, he said, "You have manifested the desire to see before you my head on a plate. If you had also wished to seize my country or only ravage part of it, I would have done the same thing to Khmer. As you have expressed only the first of these desires, I am going to apply to you the treatment you wished to apply to me, and I will then return to my country without taking anything belonging to the Khmers . . . My victory will serve as a lesson to your successors." He then lopped off the king's head and said to the Khmer prime minister, "Look now for someone who will make a good king after this fool, and put him in the place of the latter."

The new king picked by the prime minister was an excellent choice: Jayavarman II, a distant relative of the late king who had been living in Java to escape the troubles at home. In the course of his long reign (795?-850), he reunited Water Chenla and gave it a new name: Kambujadesa (the origin of the modern names Cambodia and Kampuchea). Despite his success he seems to have been an insecure monarch; he waited until 802 to have his coronation, and before 819 he changed the location of his capital no less than five times. At his last capital, he finally found peace of mind by taking part in a sacred Hindu ceremony that consecrated him as an avatar of the god Shiva and declared him and his kingdom independent of any foreign power, especially Java.

The next important Khmer king was Yasovarman I (889-900). A few miles north of the Tonle Sap he built a new city, called it Yasodharapura, and it became Cambodia's capital for the next five centuries (now it is called Angkor, meaning simply "city"). Most of Angkor's impressive buildings were built later on, but Yasovarman left his mark by constructing an excellent system of canals and reservoirs around the city, using the technology perfected in the age of Funan. Those canals would later be used to feed the large number of laborers used in Angkor's massive building projects. Fortunately for historians, Yasovarman was a great braggart (all Khmer monarchs were), and he left numerous inscriptions boasting of his achievements: "The best of kings . . . unique bundle of splendors", and "In all the sciences and all the sports . . . in dancing, singing, and all the rest, he was as clever as if he had been the first inventor of them." Then came the ultimate boast: "In seeing him, the creator was astonished and seemed to say to himself, `Why did I create a rival for myself in this king?'"

For the 10th and 11th centuries our only source of information is the inscriptions, but it was a time of growth, in size, power, and cultural sophistication. Land Chenla submitted peacefully to Angkor's rule, and it appears that the states in Thailand and Malaya did the same, during the reign of Suryavarman I (1002-50). Suryavarman's son, Udayadityavarman II (1050-66), fought an inconclusive war with the Burmese, who thought the Khmers were getting too close to Thaton. Suryavarman II (1113-50) conquered Champa and campaigned against the Vietnamese; at one point there was a Khmer army in Thanh Hoa, just 80 miles south of Hanoi.

Back at home Suryavarman II built the masterpiece of Khmer civilization. This was a temple to the Hindu god Vishnu so enormous that it was known as Angkor Wat, the "temple city." Using an estimated 455 million cubic yards of stone, this structure was built with five gilded peaks to resemble the mythical Mt. Meru. The entire structure was covered with endless reliefs showing battles, scenes from Hindu epics, and events in everyday Khmer life. The central peak of the structure was also a mausoleum, where Suryavarman's ashes were placed when he died.

The cost of building Angkor Wat and fighting wars abroad drained the treasury. After Suryavarman II was gone the Chams successfully revolted, and in 1177 they sailed up the Mekong River and plundered Angkor itself. Four years of anarchy followed, but remarkably, the best years of Cambodia's history were yet to come. Royal authority was reestablished by Jayavarman VII, a middle-aged prince who had refused the throne when it was first offered to him years before. Jayavarman routed the Chams, drove them back to their home, and was crowned the new king of Angkor. Champa would be a Khmer vassal, not the other way around.

A man of uncommon vigor, Jayavarman spent the rest of his reign (1181-1219, he lived into his 90s) building more monuments than all of the other Khmer kings put together. Chief among these was a remodeled capital city, now called Angkor Thom ("big city"), which was so big and elaborate that only nearby Angkor Wat could rival it. A convert to the Mahayana Buddhist sect, he erected Buddhist shrines and images all over the city (the sculptors used Jayavarman as the model for statues of Buddha), and converted the temples of his Hindu predecessors into Buddhist ones. Around the country he built and maintained 102 hospitals because, as one inscription put it: "He suffered from the sickness of his subjects more than from his own; for it is the public grief that causes the grief of kings, and not their grief."

Some historians believe that Jayavarman's building projects exhausted the kingdom. None of the kings after him built anything important; they lived in luxury, performed their god-king rites, but accomplished little. Champa declared independence as soon as it heard the news of Jayavarman's death, and in the west the Menam River valley was lost to newcomers in the region, the Thais. At the same time Theravada Buddhism became the most popular religion, undermining the god-king cult. In the middle of the 13th century the Khmer king himself converted to Theravada Buddhism, perhaps because of the success of the Thais, who were Theravadists already. In 1296 a Chinese visitor, Zhou Daguan, visited Angkor and took home a glowing report of the city; to him Cambodia was still the strongest state in Southeast Asia. Angkor remained Cambodia's glittering capital until 1431, but long before that time the political initiative passed to its neighbors.

[huaren]

You VC will be surprise to see the second American War + KhmerKrom + Cambodian + another three countries joint with Khmers!! to destroy you all VC . By that time, you all VC have no place to go...You all VC will be Crack and damage by American massive bomb explode!! . You all VC don't even have a DogMeat to carry with!!! The second American War will come soon!!! Your VC ha noi will be mile become an ocean!!! . RockHeart will catch DAI VIET for Asking series question!! You don't be "Jerk" on me...

RockHeart.
:genius:

I dont think this will happen. As you can see Vietnam is changing. I dont think there will be another war in Vietnam, because that is quite impossibles. except for middle east country.