Je suis Omar Posted May 22, 2015 Author Report Posted May 22, 2015 He's defending communist dictatorships. You're way off the mark again, DD, but you raise an interesting question; which is worse, defending communist dictatorships or defending USA sponsored brutal right wing dictatorships? This degree of confusion is truly monumental but what can you expect from folks who have lived under the most massive propaganda system the world has ever seen. Like the Soviet journalist who had lived in the USA for many years said, the only difference between Russian propaganda and USA propaganda is that you believe yours. they [the USA] opposed the Vietnamese puppet government.. That's absolutely hilarious. People spouting disjointed one line memes, without ever having done a lick of research in their whole lives. The USA was the one who installed the puppet government in the south. They did this because the USA knew, eisenhower knew, that the vast majority of the Vietnamese people wanted Ho Chi Minh as their leader. The rout of the French in the North by the Vietminh took place while an international conference on Indo-China was convened in Geneva in July 1954. The final declaration divided Vietnam 'temporarily' at the seventeenth parallel into two 'national regrouping areas'. North and South would be reunited following free national elections on July 26, 1956. There seemed little doubt that Ho Chi Minh would win and form Vietnam's first democratically elected government. Certainly President Eisenhower was in no doubt of this. He wrote: 'I have never talked . . . with a person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that . . . 80 percent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader." http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Pilger_John/Vietnam_Heroes.html The USA was so enamoured with their installed puppet dictator that they had him assassinated.
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2015 Report Posted May 22, 2015 How many Native Americans lived in Vietnam...besides the ones fighting the commies in Uncle Sam's Army and Marine Corps ? Economics trumps Virtue.
Je suis Omar Posted May 22, 2015 Author Report Posted May 22, 2015 Uhm, as far as I know, Western states are pretty much the only states where there IS the rule of law. In your quote, "as far as I know" is the operative phrase, Argus. The leading terrorist nation in the world, is, to your mind, a rule of law country. The country where all presidents since (at least) WWII are war criminals, that would have hung if they visited Nuremberg, indicates to your mind, a rule of law country. The "I am not a crook" crook, Nixon, was let off the hook in this, according to your thinking, rule of law nation. Gulags, torture chambers, disappearances, death camps, ..., all good indications, in your mind, that the USA is a rule of law country. The Twilight Zone.
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2015 Report Posted May 22, 2015 Gee, somebody better tell the all those Native Americans who served (and died) in the Vietnam War that it was a "genocide" During the Vietnam War, close to 90% of the 86,000 Indians who enlisted volunteered, giving Native Americans the highest record of service per capita of any ethnic group. Over half served in combat. Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2015 Report Posted May 22, 2015 Native Americans have proudly served in the U.S military since the nation was founded. http://www.defense.gov/specials/nativeamerican01/warrior.html Economics trumps Virtue.
Je suis Omar Posted May 22, 2015 Author Report Posted May 22, 2015 How many Native Americans ? Even though the USA knew full well that the Vietnamese people, by an overwhelming majority, wanted Ho Chi Minh as their leader, the evil evil USA did everything in their power to stop Vietnamese independence from happening. They supported Ho Chi Minh by a far far greater margin than has been seen for any of usa war criminal presidents "elected" since WWII. And the craziest thing of all, Ho Chi Minh wasn't even communist. Really, such evil has never existed on this planet. And you support this evil, with an enthusiasm that defies belief.
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2015 Report Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) A salute to Native American and Medal of Honor winner Master Seargent Roy P. Benavidez....for service in the Vietnam War: On May 2, 1968, a 12-man Special Forces patrol which included nine Montagnard tribesmen, was surrounded by a NVA battalion. Benavidez heard the radio appeal for help and boarded a helicopter to respond. Armed only with a knife, he jumped from the helicopter carrying his medical bag and rushed to help the trapped patrol. Benavidez "distinguished himself by a series of daring and extremely valorous actions... and because of his gallant choice to join voluntarily his comrades who were in critical straits, to expose himself constantly to withering enemy fire, and his refusal to be stopped despite numerous severe wounds, saved the lives of at least eight men." He was evacuated to the base camp, examined, and thought to be dead. As he was placed in a body bag among the other dead in body bags, he was suddenly recognized by a friend who called for help. A doctor came and examined him and he too believed Benavidez was dead. The doctor was about to zipper up the bag when Benavidez managed to spit in his face, alerting the doctor that he was still alive.[2](see medal citation below) Benavidez had a total of 37 separate bullet, bayonet, and shrapnel wounds from the six hour fight with the enemy battalion,[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Benavidez Edited May 22, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted May 22, 2015 Report Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) Most Vietnamese understand that many westerners were very much against the war our governments waged against them. They just wanted America to leave and most Americans wanted to oblige them. How many Americans were holding rallies for more intensive carpet bombing after all vs the mass rallies taking place to stop the war? Flash forward to the present were people incite the enemy and encourage the government and there's virtually no protests against waging more of the same in sight anywhere. As for retaliating there's definitely a lot of room for different responses between people with the forgiving outlook from a Buddhist tradition and the vengeful nature of the Abramaic bent...which is a lot closer to what we bring to war. Edited May 22, 2015 by eyeball A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2015 Report Posted May 22, 2015 (edited) Most Vietnamese understand that many westerners were very much against the war our governments waged against them. They just wanted America to leave and most Americans wanted to oblige them. How many Americans were holding rallies for more intensive carpet bombing after all vs the mass rallies taking place to stop the war? Oh sure...they wanted the Americans to leave so they could jump on the helos with them to leave Ho Chi Minh City !! More Americans served in the war than ever protested at "rallies". Edited May 22, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 Not at all, he was a communist, part of the China/Soviet Union/North Vietnam group of friends. "The only difference between USSR propaganda and USA propaganda is that people in North America believe USA propaganda. " Friends of Pol Pot By John Pilger The Nation May 1, 1998 ... It is all too easy and too dangerous to remember Pol Pot as a unique monster. What is remarkable about the US. coverage of his death is the omission of U.S. complicity in his rise to power, a complicity that sustained him for almost two decades. For the truth is that Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge would be historical nonentities - and a great many people would be alive today had Washington not helped bring them to power and the governments of the United States, Britain, China and Thailand not supported them, armed them, sustained them and restored them. In other words, the iconic images of the piles of skulls ought to include those who, often at great remove in distance and culture, were Pol Pot's accessories and Faustian partners for the purposes of their own imperial imperatives. To hear Henry Kissinger deny recently that the United States and especially the Nixon Administration bore any responsibility for Cambodia's horror was to hear truth denigrated and our intelligence insulted. For Cambodia's nightmare did not begin with Year Zero but on the eve of the U.S. land invasion of neutral Cambodia in 1970. The invasion provided a small group of extreme ethnic nationalists with Maoist pretensions, the Khmer Rouge, with a catalyst for a revolution that had no popular base among the Cambodian people. Between 1969 and 1973, U.S. bombers killed perhaps three-quarters of a million Cambodian peasants in an attempt to destroy North Vietnamese supply bases, many of which did not exist. During one six-month period in 1973, B-52s dropped more bombs on Cambodians, living mostly in straw huts, than were dropped on Japan during all of World War II, the equivalent of five Hiroshimas. Evidence from U.S. official documents, declassified in 1987, leaves no doubt that this US. terror was critical in Pol Pot's drive for power. "They are using [the bombing] as the main theme of the propaganda reported the C.I.A. Director of Operations on May 2, 1973. "This approach has resulted in the successful recruitment of a number of young men [and] the propaganda has been most effective among refugees subjected to B-52 strikes." What Kissinger and Nixon began, Pol Pot completed. Had the United States and China allowed it, Cambodia's suffering could have stopped when the Vietnamese finally responded to years of Khmer Rouge attacks across their border and liberated the country in January 1979. But almost immediately the United States began secretly backing Pol Pot in exile. Direct contact was made between the Reagan White House and the Khmer Rouge when Dr. Ray Cline, a former deputy director of the C.I.A., made a clandestine visit to Pol Pot's operational base inside Cambodia in November 1980. Cline was then a foreign policy adviser to President-elect Reagan. Within a year some fifty C.I.A. and other intelligence agents were running Washington's secret war against Cambodia from the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok and along the Thai-Cambodian border. The aim was to appease China, the great Soviet foe and Pol Pot's most enduring backer, and to rehabilitate and use the Khmer Rouge to bring pressure on the source of recent U.S. humiliation in the region: the Vietnamese. Cambodia was now America's "last battle of the Vietnam War," as one U.S. official put it, "so that we can achieve a better result." Two U.S. relief aid workers, Linda Mason and Roger Brown, later wrote, "The US. government insisted that the Khmer Rouge be fed ... the U.S. preferred that the Khmer Rouge operation benefit from the credibility of an internationally known relief operation." In 1980, under U.S. pressure, the World Food Programme handed over food worth $12 million to pass on to the Khmer Rouge. In that year, I traveled on a U.N. convoy of forty trucks into Cambodia from Thailand and filmed a U.N. official handing the supplies over to a Khmer Rouge general, Nam Phan, known to Western aid officials as The Butcher. There is little doubt that without this support and the flow of arms from China through Thailand the Khmer Rouge would have withered on the vine. https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/190/39190.html
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 "The only difference between USSR propaganda and USA propaganda is that people in North America believe USA propaganda. " Canada sure gobbles it up....state funded CBC programming is just bloody awful !! Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) "The only difference between USSR propaganda and USA propaganda is that people in North America believe USA propaganda. " Nah. The difference between the two is a free and democratic America vs a repessive dictatorial regime. There's a reason why people use to have to defect from there in order to leave. If you wanna leave America, you just decide when and which flight to book! Edited May 23, 2015 by Shady
eyeball Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 Oh sure...they wanted the Americans to leave so they could jump on the helos with them to leave Ho Chi Minh City !! I'm sure there were a few who left with the French when the finally got the boot too. More Americans served in the war than ever protested at "rallies". That sounds hard to believe, needless to say thousands of Vietnam veterans joined the protests too. There doesn't appear to have been much in the way of protests against the American Indian Wars though. That's the pagan ethos the west could sure use today don't you think? A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 Nah. The difference between the two is a free and democratic America vs a repessive dictatorial regime. There's a reason why people use to have to defect from there in order to leave. If you wanna leave America, you just decide when and which flight to book! Yeah, the "land of the free" were prohibited from traveling to Cuba! How unlike you, Shady, to neglect the main point of a post to fly off on a tangent. The USA provided PolPot and the Khmer Rouge their path to governance. The USA also continued to support these same fanatical killers in the typical USA fanatical manner. It doesn't matter to the USA, it never has, how many innocents are slaughtered, whether it be at the hands of the USA or one of its killer subsidiaries. There is now a separate thread on this USA- PolPot/Khmer Rouge friendship. I'm sure you can find your way there.
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 North Vietnam. They pretend to value freedom, but then cozy up to the Soviet Union, the most anti-freedom regime in the history of the world. There was no North Vietnam and south Vietnam. That was a fiction created by the Americans to create an illusion that people in the south supported the USA. That was just one of many Usa silly notions; one of many that the gullible swallow. Vietnam excerpted from the book Heroes by John Pilger ... When I began to write this, in 1985, ten years after the end of the war in Vietnam, I heard the results of an opinion poll in which people in the United States were asked how much they could remember about the war. More than a third could not say which side America had supported and some believed that North Vietnam had been 'our allies'.' This reminded me of something a friend of mine, Bob Muller, a former US marine officer paralysed from the waist down as a result of the war, told me. As president of the Vietnam Veterans of America, Bob speaks on college campuses where he is asked as a matter of routine, 'Which side did you fight on?' This 'historical amnesia' is not accidental; if anything it demonstrates the insidious power of the dominant propaganda of the Vietnam war. The constant American government line was that the war was essentially a conflict of Vietnamese against Vietnamese, in which Americans became 'involved', mistakenly and honourably. This assumption was shared both by 'hawks' and 'doves'; it permeated the media coverage during the war and has been the overriding theme of numerous retrospectives since the war. It is a false and frequently dishonest assumption. The longest war this century was a war waged by America against Vietnam, North and South. It was an attack on the people of Vietnam, communist and non-communist, by American forces. It was an invasion of their homeland and their lives. Just as the current presence in Afghanistan of Soviet forces is an invasion. Neither began as a mistake. So it is not surprising that many Americans are today confused about who their 'allies' were during the war, because in reality they had none. Clients yes, allies no. The difference is as critical as the difference between 'attacked' and 'became involved', for it is the clear division of truth from propaganda. The war in Vietnam was the first television war, watched by millions year after year. But the news became a mockery, telling so much and explaining so lie. And such is the obsolescence today of unpalatable, 'forgotten' events that a reminder of some of them seems important if mendacity and illusion are not to be transmuted into history: a process now well under way. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Pilger_John/Vietnam_Heroes.html
Shady Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 Yeah, the "land of the free" were prohibited from traveling to Cuba! How unlike you, Shady, to neglect the main point of a post to fly off on a tangent. The USA provided PolPot and the Khmer Rouge their path to governance. The USA also continued to support these same fanatical killers in the typical USA fanatical manner. It doesn't matter to the USA, it never has, how many innocents are slaughtered, whether it be at the hands of the USA or one of its killer subsidiaries. There is now a separate thread on this USA- PolPot/Khmer Rouge friendship. I'm sure you can find your way there. That's patently false. Your propaganda isn't working.
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 That's patently false. Your propaganda isn't working. Do you know what an American apparatchik is? Friends of PolPot ... It is all too easy and too dangerous to remember Pol Pot as a unique monster. What is remarkable about the US. coverage of his death is the omission of U.S. complicity in his rise to power, a complicity that sustained him for almost two decades. For the truth is that Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge would be historical nonentities - and a great many people would be alive today had Washington not helped bring them to power and the governments of the United States, Britain, China and Thailand not supported them, armed them, sustained them and restored them. In other words, the iconic images of the piles of skulls ought to include those who, often at great remove in distance and culture, were Pol Pot's accessories and Faustian partners for the purposes of their own imperial imperatives. https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/190/39190.html
Freddy Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) People don't like it when their ox has been gored. Consider how you'd feel if you had been carpet bombed by the USA, had your towns and villages napalmed, Agent Orange sprayed all over your children, grandchildren and unborn. Had your loved ones injured daily by USA planted WMDs. You remind me of a woman. There is no way you have a set of testicle.... Edited May 23, 2015 by Freddy
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) You remind me of a woman. There is no way you have a set of testicles....Am I to take it that you consider it brave to carpet bomb defenseless civilians from 30,000 feet? Is it brave to napalm little children? Is it brave to gather villagers into a group and machine gun them, walking into the trenches dug to ensure all the babies were dead? Do you consider it brave to spread bomblets around for little children to play with. I read some 60 afghans a day are killed, most of them children, by these nice USA presents. Ain't that America, land of the brave. Edited May 23, 2015 by Je suis Omar
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 Am I to take it that you consider it brave to carpet bomb defenseless civilians from 30,000 feet? Native Americans were never carpet bombed from 30,000 feet. Economics trumps Virtue.
Freddy Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 Am I to take it that you consider it brave to carpet bomb defenseless civilians from 30,000 feet? Is it brave to napalm little children? Is it brave to gather villagers into a group and machine gun them, walking into the trenches dug to ensure all the babies were dead? Do you consider it brave to spread bomblets around for little children to play with. I read some 60 afghans a day are killed, most of them children, by these nice USA presents. Ain't that America, land of the brave. They rule the world. It's for them to do with it as they wish. And there is nothing you can do about it.
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) They rule the world. It's for them to do with it as they wish. And there is nothing you can do about it. Would you then volunteer, or accept being conscripted into a USA death squad? EDIT: Above question asked (in another thread) and answered by Freddy. He said YES. Would you have willingly worked in a Nazis concentration/death camp to ensure your standard of living remained constant? Edited May 23, 2015 by Je suis Omar
eyeball Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 Native Americans were never carpet bombed from 30,000 feet.Yeah but that's only because your settlers didn't have carpet bombers.Ours of course would have used blanket bombers. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Freddy Posted May 23, 2015 Report Posted May 23, 2015 Would you then volunteer, or accept being conscripted into a USA death squad? Yes. There are to many humans on earth, We have no other natural predators but other humans. What do we do when the gopher population gets out of hand? Send out the death squads. In the last 60 years we haven't had anywhere close to the kind of war casualties as Nature requires to keep human population from overwhelming the planet. War is part of Nature.
Je suis Omar Posted May 23, 2015 Author Report Posted May 23, 2015 Yes. There are to many humans on earth, We have no other natural predators but other humans. What do we do when the gopher population gets out of hand? Send out the death squads. In the last 60 years we haven't had anywhere close to the kind of war casualties as Nature requires to keep human population from overwhelming the planet. War is part of Nature. Can I assume from this that your answer to, Would you have willingly worked in a Nazis concentration/death camp to ensure your standard of living remained constant? is also a resounding "Yes"?
Recommended Posts