Lots of comments coming from all over the Country. One in particular, was most interesting.
Bernard T. Diable, former CW2 Tac Officer from the Fort Wolters, Texas days has added more information to the political documents I mentioned earlier . He took CW2 Machen's place at the 5th Warrant Officer Candidate Company, Flight A1 (August 1969), has signed in and added to the historical information that has been posted here.
Bernie sent an email reminder for me to look into SEATO, which is the South East Asia Treaty Organization. As a coincidence, SEATO came along in 1954 which was the same time frame when the 1954 Geneva Accords came to be. This one also tells a story about political maneuverings that were going on at the time the French took a nose dive at Dien Bien Phu.
You combat Veterans and history freaks will find this addition most interesting as it included specific language regarding Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. I have a suggestion for those of you who are really interested in the factual part of things that produced such a screw up as the one we found in the 60's and 70's. Google SEATO and go over the details. You will be surprised at the information there. I thought I was well read in that department but I surely missed out on this one.
In an attempt to help you gather all the information together, please take a look at the SEATO site and take note of all the Countries involved. You will find the Philippines, Thailand and other Countries involved here and that will help you later on in these posts as an upcoming editorial that I intend to post here has a much larger scope than Vietnam alone.
Special thanks to Bernie Diable and Curt Lambert for the comments. Additional thanks to Ed Wolfe, my first room mate in Vietnam when I reported to the 199th Light Infantry Brigade in Long Binh in May of 1970.
For you new readers, you can go to "older posts" and rummage around there for separate stories about Ed Wolfe, Craig Wollman, Dudley Doc Young and other pilots who were most influential in my combat tour. As you can see by the information regarding SEATO, they are still influential.
As a final comment for today, I would like to say that there will be a very detailed editorial posted soon and knowing all the details will provide you with a very well informed background of all the facts that surrounded the political situation we unknowingly faced when we arrived for combat duty.
I consider those facts as the single, most important information base from which an intellectual determination can be made regarding the how, why and who was responsible for the mess. It will also allow you to view the after affects of the war from a different perspective. Enjoy the read. Thanks again for the comments. Tim
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Friday, September 20, 2013
Common Denominators, Colonialization, Politics and the Military
There's a guy in New York State, or somewhere around D.C., and I recall reading some comments he made about reports surrounding the Vietnam War. The one that stuck with me the most focused on: "Facts vs the Opinions given by the main stream media". I have to give him credit for these thoughts. Thanks to Bob Van Metter. With that in mind and to help summarize these last posts regarding WHO lost the war, I have the following points to make.
First of all, let's do a quick review of this idea about Colonies and the madness that surrounds the idea of Colonization. The Spanish lost theirs, the British lost theirs and so did the French. If one can classify Hitler as someone who had ideas of Colonization, it's clear that he lost his and so did the Japanese in 1945.
I realize that there's a lot of difference between the way the French, Spanish and British did theirs and the methods that Hitler and Tojo used to accomplish theirs but the end result was pretty much the same. All of them failed.
Now, as it relates to facts instead of opinions, let us say that the USA has never been a Country that had Colonization as part of their agenda. We bought our way through the Louisiana Purchase and pretty much did the same thing with Mexico when we paid both of those Countries to settle territorial issues that came with the thoughts of "undoing" foreign Colonial claims in America.
As I recall the details, I think 15 million dollars was the price for each of those deals. Having said that, let me simply say that the borders of the United States were established by a land purchase that specifically identified where the boundaries were.
Now onto the scene comes another issue. I have to give credit to some little 7th grade boy from Vivian, Louisiana who was asked if he knew what the Vietnam War was about. He answered that question with these words: "It was when the Communist North wanted the Capitalist South". I have to say that this is pretty cool for a 7th grader but I must also say that it is only part of the story.
If you asked Ho Chi Minh, Ho would say that they, the Vietnamese, had been fighting for independence for 1,000 years. I think that it's pretty clear that Ho was referring to the Chinese, the Japanese and the French but in any event, his idea was ONE Vietnam, not two.
Now onto the scene comes the United States. The main concern, at the beginning, was to prevent the spread of communism and allowing missile launching sites to be placed on the coast of the South China Sea. That's probably not the only reason but that's one of the reasons given in reports I've read of how all of it got started in the first place.
Having made these statements let me say that there can not be any doubt that it all started with the historically failed policies of Colonialism. Whether it was the Chinese, the French or the Japanese, really makes no difference. It was Vietnamese land and none of the above had any business being there. That's my opinion but there sure are a lot of facts that surround that claim.
Now comes the 93rd Congress. As I recall my studies of all this, I believe that it was this particular group that decided to veto Nixon's efforts to guarantee support to the South Vietnamese if the North Vietnamese broke the agreements in the Paris Peace Accords.
Now, with regard to Bob's wishes to see facts as facts and opinions as opinions, let me say that the way I see it, is as follows. First and foremost, the military did NOT lose the war. Second to that, let me say that the 93rd Congress made it impossible for the military to insure that the Paris Peace Accords were followed by both sides. Third and most importantly, when the North Vietnamese found out about the War Powers Act, they knew that there was nothing that could stop them.
In a nutshell, those are the facts. I conclude that the 93rd Congress was the single most influential body that allowed the North Vietnamese to take over South.
I'll stop now but I'm only finished with the fault part of this dissertation. There's a huge consequence on the horizon but I wanted to wait for a comment or two before I begin to connect those dots. Comments appreciated. TButler94@hotmail.com
First of all, let's do a quick review of this idea about Colonies and the madness that surrounds the idea of Colonization. The Spanish lost theirs, the British lost theirs and so did the French. If one can classify Hitler as someone who had ideas of Colonization, it's clear that he lost his and so did the Japanese in 1945.
I realize that there's a lot of difference between the way the French, Spanish and British did theirs and the methods that Hitler and Tojo used to accomplish theirs but the end result was pretty much the same. All of them failed.
Now, as it relates to facts instead of opinions, let us say that the USA has never been a Country that had Colonization as part of their agenda. We bought our way through the Louisiana Purchase and pretty much did the same thing with Mexico when we paid both of those Countries to settle territorial issues that came with the thoughts of "undoing" foreign Colonial claims in America.
As I recall the details, I think 15 million dollars was the price for each of those deals. Having said that, let me simply say that the borders of the United States were established by a land purchase that specifically identified where the boundaries were.
Now onto the scene comes another issue. I have to give credit to some little 7th grade boy from Vivian, Louisiana who was asked if he knew what the Vietnam War was about. He answered that question with these words: "It was when the Communist North wanted the Capitalist South". I have to say that this is pretty cool for a 7th grader but I must also say that it is only part of the story.
If you asked Ho Chi Minh, Ho would say that they, the Vietnamese, had been fighting for independence for 1,000 years. I think that it's pretty clear that Ho was referring to the Chinese, the Japanese and the French but in any event, his idea was ONE Vietnam, not two.
Now onto the scene comes the United States. The main concern, at the beginning, was to prevent the spread of communism and allowing missile launching sites to be placed on the coast of the South China Sea. That's probably not the only reason but that's one of the reasons given in reports I've read of how all of it got started in the first place.
Having made these statements let me say that there can not be any doubt that it all started with the historically failed policies of Colonialism. Whether it was the Chinese, the French or the Japanese, really makes no difference. It was Vietnamese land and none of the above had any business being there. That's my opinion but there sure are a lot of facts that surround that claim.
Now comes the 93rd Congress. As I recall my studies of all this, I believe that it was this particular group that decided to veto Nixon's efforts to guarantee support to the South Vietnamese if the North Vietnamese broke the agreements in the Paris Peace Accords.
Now, with regard to Bob's wishes to see facts as facts and opinions as opinions, let me say that the way I see it, is as follows. First and foremost, the military did NOT lose the war. Second to that, let me say that the 93rd Congress made it impossible for the military to insure that the Paris Peace Accords were followed by both sides. Third and most importantly, when the North Vietnamese found out about the War Powers Act, they knew that there was nothing that could stop them.
In a nutshell, those are the facts. I conclude that the 93rd Congress was the single most influential body that allowed the North Vietnamese to take over South.
I'll stop now but I'm only finished with the fault part of this dissertation. There's a huge consequence on the horizon but I wanted to wait for a comment or two before I begin to connect those dots. Comments appreciated. TButler94@hotmail.com
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Welcome Colorado Veterans
I received an email last night from Melissa's older son. He attached a picture of a motorcycle jacket that he took somewhere near Durango, Colorado. The jacket had a picture of a bike on the back that was surrounded by the words "Vets Don't Forget". The picture shows a few bikers riding down the road. Behind them there were Huey's flying in the background.
It started a thought process for me and I wanted to mention it now.
First of all, I wanted to extend a "Welcome" to all the Veterans in Colorado and provide a suggestion that the new guys contact more Veterans and give them this blog address. That invitation is for all Veterans. Most of the guys I served with are still in contact with many of the men they served with and many, through other Veteran Associations, are in contact with many more. I only hope that they pass the word to their buddies and that many more will sign on here and begin reading some of these thoughts.
Recent studies I've made provided the population numbers from the Veteran's Corp. Believe it or not, there are 22.7 million of us out here. That's a huge, huge number of people but more importantly, it constitutes a group of Patriots that stood up to the plate and answered the call to duty. When you think about the caliber of men and women who've done that and compare them to the nare do well assholes who are here to derail everything that we fought for, it makes a really big difference.
I don't know how many Veterans are active in various military sites but I did discover that 30% or more belong to the VFW and the American Legion. It may be more than that but memory seems to bring up 30% as the number I read about.
I don't belong to the American Legion or the VFW. I've had an invitation to join both but I'm not comfortable with making commitments to attend anything at any specific time and that's only due to my current physical condition. For those of you who do not know, I underwent emergency brain surgery to remove a brain tumor that proved to be malignant Glioblastoma. The brain surgery was most traumatic as the tumor was as big as a golf ball. I don't know how thick it was but it was thick enough to force them to remove some of my right temporal lobe.
I elected to engage in chemo therapy and radiation treatments as I was told that without that, I had 3 months to 12 months to live. That was in July of 2009. I just passed my 4th year catscan that shows no further growth and the prognosis is excellent. Despite that, I've lost my right eye and I'm not anywhere near the "back to normal" condition most of us try to achieve after any kind of surgery.
Having said that, and being the kind of guy I am, I still wanted to be active in anything that would be a benefit to the Veteran population. I can do a pretty good job from this computer but that can only go so far.
I've had some suggestions to change the name of the blog as most Veterans who might search the web for Veteran based web sites would never type in the word "Church" to begin their search. For the new readership I wanted to explain that I used the title "Churchofwhatshappninnow" as an analogy to demonstrate a couple of things. The first demonstration was to advise everyone that "If you don't attend the Church of What's Happenin' Now, you may end up being transferred to the Church of the Painful Truth".
Now that time has marched on, I can see that the message is more appropriate now than it was when Tim Jr and Melissa agreed to that name and created this blog. Four years later, let me say that I paid attention to the things that were happening in my life NOW and by making the choice to take chemo and radiation, I saved myself from a transfer to the Church of the Painful Truth.
I guess that's it for today and I hope that the message will be spread to more and more Veterans. I have lots of details here, especially details about the Vietnam War that you guys will find most informative. Comments are appreciated. Welcome aboard.
It started a thought process for me and I wanted to mention it now.
First of all, I wanted to extend a "Welcome" to all the Veterans in Colorado and provide a suggestion that the new guys contact more Veterans and give them this blog address. That invitation is for all Veterans. Most of the guys I served with are still in contact with many of the men they served with and many, through other Veteran Associations, are in contact with many more. I only hope that they pass the word to their buddies and that many more will sign on here and begin reading some of these thoughts.
Recent studies I've made provided the population numbers from the Veteran's Corp. Believe it or not, there are 22.7 million of us out here. That's a huge, huge number of people but more importantly, it constitutes a group of Patriots that stood up to the plate and answered the call to duty. When you think about the caliber of men and women who've done that and compare them to the nare do well assholes who are here to derail everything that we fought for, it makes a really big difference.
I don't know how many Veterans are active in various military sites but I did discover that 30% or more belong to the VFW and the American Legion. It may be more than that but memory seems to bring up 30% as the number I read about.
I don't belong to the American Legion or the VFW. I've had an invitation to join both but I'm not comfortable with making commitments to attend anything at any specific time and that's only due to my current physical condition. For those of you who do not know, I underwent emergency brain surgery to remove a brain tumor that proved to be malignant Glioblastoma. The brain surgery was most traumatic as the tumor was as big as a golf ball. I don't know how thick it was but it was thick enough to force them to remove some of my right temporal lobe.
I elected to engage in chemo therapy and radiation treatments as I was told that without that, I had 3 months to 12 months to live. That was in July of 2009. I just passed my 4th year catscan that shows no further growth and the prognosis is excellent. Despite that, I've lost my right eye and I'm not anywhere near the "back to normal" condition most of us try to achieve after any kind of surgery.
Having said that, and being the kind of guy I am, I still wanted to be active in anything that would be a benefit to the Veteran population. I can do a pretty good job from this computer but that can only go so far.
I've had some suggestions to change the name of the blog as most Veterans who might search the web for Veteran based web sites would never type in the word "Church" to begin their search. For the new readership I wanted to explain that I used the title "Churchofwhatshappninnow" as an analogy to demonstrate a couple of things. The first demonstration was to advise everyone that "If you don't attend the Church of What's Happenin' Now, you may end up being transferred to the Church of the Painful Truth".
Now that time has marched on, I can see that the message is more appropriate now than it was when Tim Jr and Melissa agreed to that name and created this blog. Four years later, let me say that I paid attention to the things that were happening in my life NOW and by making the choice to take chemo and radiation, I saved myself from a transfer to the Church of the Painful Truth.
I guess that's it for today and I hope that the message will be spread to more and more Veterans. I have lots of details here, especially details about the Vietnam War that you guys will find most informative. Comments are appreciated. Welcome aboard.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Switching Gears.
These posts have been really strange for me as they actually began on a military site that focuses on the history of the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Air Cav Troop, a unit that I flew helicopters for in Vietnam and Cambodia between September of 1970 and May of 1971.
I was flying for the 199th Light Infantry Brigade between May of 1970 and September when I went to the 11th Cav mentioned above. I note that because I think it's important for you to know that I was already considered a seasoned Night Hawk Gunship pilot when I arrived at the 11th Cav.
I have to give credit where credit is due so let me say that none of this would have ever started if it wasn't for Former Chief Warrant Officer Bill Reinhardt, the father of the 11thacraviation.com site.
In a more humorous sense, I wanted to say that in case these posts jump the track. That way, I can blame Bill for all of it. Just kidding, Bill. I had to put that in there.
Initially, this whole thing started out as a debate about the Vietnam War. Ultimately, it ended up as editorials and comments without any counterpoints being posted. With that in mind, I thought that the best thing I could do was continue with the reports here and have them post it on the 11th Cav site, if that's what they deem best.
With today's Political Correctness Virus and the apparent concerns about posting comments of a political nature, I think that it would be much smarter for me to say what I want to say here and avoid any concerns that web site owners on other military sites, might have. I say this because I can't figure out any way to make an intellectually based comment about the War, without including political issues.
I'm somewhat paranoid about this issue that I feel the need to explain the previous comment that contains the words, "intellectually based comment".
I do NOT intend to insinuate that comments that differ with mine are not made in an intellectual manner. I do mean to say that I am most careful to avoid any emotional statements and strictly stick to the facts. I do this to insure that I can demonstrate to be true, any statements I make. I generally use google as an easily accessible source to confirm these but many of them come from a long list of books I've read concerning the history of South East Asia.
Having said that, I would like to give you a thought or two that may help you see what's coming.
I've already posted the statistics from the "War of Attrition" post I made earlier but for the new readership here, I'll give you a brief outline of the numbers. They lost 1,100,000 killed in action. We lost 58,000. That's just the beginning.
Unfortunately, using a death ratio of 21 to 1 to determine who won or who lost, is a sad thing. Despite that, so is the insanity that came after the War when the media blamed the United States Military for the loss. Our military wasn't the only participant in the War and to counter the madness that blamed us for the loss, I think it is important to outline all of the participants that took a part in the decision making process that produced the result that came when Saigon fell in 1975.
In order to counter the one sided blame scenario that founded the reports from idiots in the media, I feel the need to start at the beginning. That would be "Colonial Empire Building". I say that because the French were there in the late 1800's. If you will recall your history, we had just finished correcting all the screw ups from the British Empire and their misguided policies when we were considered a Colony. Get the connection? In a sense, we weren't much different than the Vietnamese people were, as it relates to that.
To set the stage for blame, let me ask you to review the history of Colonization. The Spanish Empire is a good place to start. Most of us already know that Spain's Empire building in the Americas began in 1492 and ran through 1898. If you will, you can google The Spanish Empire and get a ton of details to support these statements.
There won't be a test but there still are consequences from those days and you will be a hell of a lot better off if you have the Big Picture that can only come from knowing the entire story. Please take a moment to review that as I will be connecting the dots later on.
I have to stop now and run to the hospital to refill the brain swelling meds that I'm still taking. Yesterday's Catscan report shows that the malignant cancer isn't back and I'm really focused on staying healthy and sharing as much information as I can about a subject that is as screwed up as The Vietnam War. Thanks for the comments.
.
I was flying for the 199th Light Infantry Brigade between May of 1970 and September when I went to the 11th Cav mentioned above. I note that because I think it's important for you to know that I was already considered a seasoned Night Hawk Gunship pilot when I arrived at the 11th Cav.
I have to give credit where credit is due so let me say that none of this would have ever started if it wasn't for Former Chief Warrant Officer Bill Reinhardt, the father of the 11thacraviation.com site.
In a more humorous sense, I wanted to say that in case these posts jump the track. That way, I can blame Bill for all of it. Just kidding, Bill. I had to put that in there.
Initially, this whole thing started out as a debate about the Vietnam War. Ultimately, it ended up as editorials and comments without any counterpoints being posted. With that in mind, I thought that the best thing I could do was continue with the reports here and have them post it on the 11th Cav site, if that's what they deem best.
With today's Political Correctness Virus and the apparent concerns about posting comments of a political nature, I think that it would be much smarter for me to say what I want to say here and avoid any concerns that web site owners on other military sites, might have. I say this because I can't figure out any way to make an intellectually based comment about the War, without including political issues.
I'm somewhat paranoid about this issue that I feel the need to explain the previous comment that contains the words, "intellectually based comment".
I do NOT intend to insinuate that comments that differ with mine are not made in an intellectual manner. I do mean to say that I am most careful to avoid any emotional statements and strictly stick to the facts. I do this to insure that I can demonstrate to be true, any statements I make. I generally use google as an easily accessible source to confirm these but many of them come from a long list of books I've read concerning the history of South East Asia.
Having said that, I would like to give you a thought or two that may help you see what's coming.
I've already posted the statistics from the "War of Attrition" post I made earlier but for the new readership here, I'll give you a brief outline of the numbers. They lost 1,100,000 killed in action. We lost 58,000. That's just the beginning.
Unfortunately, using a death ratio of 21 to 1 to determine who won or who lost, is a sad thing. Despite that, so is the insanity that came after the War when the media blamed the United States Military for the loss. Our military wasn't the only participant in the War and to counter the madness that blamed us for the loss, I think it is important to outline all of the participants that took a part in the decision making process that produced the result that came when Saigon fell in 1975.
In order to counter the one sided blame scenario that founded the reports from idiots in the media, I feel the need to start at the beginning. That would be "Colonial Empire Building". I say that because the French were there in the late 1800's. If you will recall your history, we had just finished correcting all the screw ups from the British Empire and their misguided policies when we were considered a Colony. Get the connection? In a sense, we weren't much different than the Vietnamese people were, as it relates to that.
To set the stage for blame, let me ask you to review the history of Colonization. The Spanish Empire is a good place to start. Most of us already know that Spain's Empire building in the Americas began in 1492 and ran through 1898. If you will, you can google The Spanish Empire and get a ton of details to support these statements.
There won't be a test but there still are consequences from those days and you will be a hell of a lot better off if you have the Big Picture that can only come from knowing the entire story. Please take a moment to review that as I will be connecting the dots later on.
I have to stop now and run to the hospital to refill the brain swelling meds that I'm still taking. Yesterday's Catscan report shows that the malignant cancer isn't back and I'm really focused on staying healthy and sharing as much information as I can about a subject that is as screwed up as The Vietnam War. Thanks for the comments.
.
Saturday, September 14, 2013
The "French" part of French Indo China
Does it surprise you to know that the French claimed French Indo China as "theirs" in 1887? If that's not enough, let's add Laos and Cambodia in 1893. You may find it interesting to note that the capitol moved from Saigon to Hanoi in 1902 which was only 9 years later.
During the Second World War, between 1939 and 1945, it was moved to Da Lat but after the Japanese surrender, it moved back to Hanoi.
In 1941, the Viet Minh, a communist Army led by Ho Chi Minh, revolted against the French and other foreign rule. They used guerilla warfare against all who opposed their demand for independence. Please note that an anti communist State was granted in 1949 and Saigon became it's capitol.
Despite the end of World War II, the French attempted to maintain their presence there. It's odd, don't you think, that the French lost it all 9 years after that at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu. After all that, now comes the 1954 Geneva Accords. During those negotiations, Cambodia and Laos was involved and within 15 days of the cease fire on August 22, 1954, the French agreed to withdraw.
This will end the first notes I wanted to make about the beginning of hostilities in South East Asia. It also begins the legacy of colonialism. If I don't make any points here, I do want to instill in the readership that the trouble started long before any of us ever heard of Vietnam. Comments are appreciated.
During the Second World War, between 1939 and 1945, it was moved to Da Lat but after the Japanese surrender, it moved back to Hanoi.
In 1941, the Viet Minh, a communist Army led by Ho Chi Minh, revolted against the French and other foreign rule. They used guerilla warfare against all who opposed their demand for independence. Please note that an anti communist State was granted in 1949 and Saigon became it's capitol.
Despite the end of World War II, the French attempted to maintain their presence there. It's odd, don't you think, that the French lost it all 9 years after that at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu. After all that, now comes the 1954 Geneva Accords. During those negotiations, Cambodia and Laos was involved and within 15 days of the cease fire on August 22, 1954, the French agreed to withdraw.
This will end the first notes I wanted to make about the beginning of hostilities in South East Asia. It also begins the legacy of colonialism. If I don't make any points here, I do want to instill in the readership that the trouble started long before any of us ever heard of Vietnam. Comments are appreciated.
Friday, September 13, 2013
Finally, a comment!
It's funny how hindsight works. This is especially true when it comes to the moments that arrive after a debate ends. History is a funny thing and unfortunately for the Vietnam Veteran, most of the written words about that war seem to be spurred on by emotion and opinion and not historical fact that can easily be demonstrated to be true.
As I mentioned earlier, I had been invited to participate in a debate about the Vietnam War. I fought there and had my own emotional experiences about all the things I saw and did. I believe that I am fortunate enough to classify those military experiences into a single category and then study all the other influences that brought us to the time when we sent some advisors there.
Those influences must include knowing about the circumstances that existed long before most of us were even born. Once you realize that a whole lot of things went down before we ever came along, you might begin to get your arms around the Big Picture.
For some reason, I want to make mention of a World Series game that was allegedly rigged. The majority of players involved in that game worked their asses off but in a sense, the deck was stacked against them and those who were clean of any wrong doing, didn't have a clue who was pulling the strings.
That may not be a good analogy but at this point, somebody has to start somewhere as the Lost War concept never seems to disconnect itself from the players in the military. It's just like the guys on the baseball field.
Even if you do nothing but focus on the influences that came over a century before we arrived, you will eventually find out that we weren't the ones who started anything. It was already there. If you recall the British and their conduct just prior to our own American Revolution, you may begin to get the picture.
Connecting the dots is so simple, that to me, it defies any logical conclusions that the MILITARY lost the war. Even if you go beyond the statistics found within a war of attrition where we lost 58,000 men and they lost 1,100,000 men, one must conclude that there is something else missing.
Even though I've already suggested a list of source documents to read, a list that provides the real situations that existed before, during and after our departure, I've not seen a confirming comment from another site I've posted the editorials on. The Rise and Fall of the Japanese Empire, The 1954 Geneva Accords, The Paris Peace Accords and The War Powers Act are just 4 references.. Despite the fact that this list isn't a quick read, I haven't heard a single word or thought about it except for Ed Wolfe's comment here. Ed was my first room mate in Vietnam.
I feel compelled to get further into it and focus on three words that were used to describe the reporters that worked during the Johnson Administration. Those three words are: "A compliant media".
I'm not sure if it would do anything at all for me as I already know the answer. I'm not sure if it would do anything for the readers as I've already put out a ton of information and really don't have much of a response column to quote from.
It seems that this subject is so sensitive that there isn't much to be said from the Veterans who still suffer from all the lies and propaganda that came during the sixties and early seventies. I've not made a single Post Debate comment on the Cav site I've been working with, as the end results that prove that we, The Military, didn't lose the war, don't appear to produce a greater understanding of how things ended up as they did.
At the moment, I think I'll invite them to continue with the debate but post my thoughts here and ask them to make the decision to post it there....................or not. Thanks, Eddie.
As I mentioned earlier, I had been invited to participate in a debate about the Vietnam War. I fought there and had my own emotional experiences about all the things I saw and did. I believe that I am fortunate enough to classify those military experiences into a single category and then study all the other influences that brought us to the time when we sent some advisors there.
Those influences must include knowing about the circumstances that existed long before most of us were even born. Once you realize that a whole lot of things went down before we ever came along, you might begin to get your arms around the Big Picture.
For some reason, I want to make mention of a World Series game that was allegedly rigged. The majority of players involved in that game worked their asses off but in a sense, the deck was stacked against them and those who were clean of any wrong doing, didn't have a clue who was pulling the strings.
That may not be a good analogy but at this point, somebody has to start somewhere as the Lost War concept never seems to disconnect itself from the players in the military. It's just like the guys on the baseball field.
Even if you do nothing but focus on the influences that came over a century before we arrived, you will eventually find out that we weren't the ones who started anything. It was already there. If you recall the British and their conduct just prior to our own American Revolution, you may begin to get the picture.
Connecting the dots is so simple, that to me, it defies any logical conclusions that the MILITARY lost the war. Even if you go beyond the statistics found within a war of attrition where we lost 58,000 men and they lost 1,100,000 men, one must conclude that there is something else missing.
Even though I've already suggested a list of source documents to read, a list that provides the real situations that existed before, during and after our departure, I've not seen a confirming comment from another site I've posted the editorials on. The Rise and Fall of the Japanese Empire, The 1954 Geneva Accords, The Paris Peace Accords and The War Powers Act are just 4 references.. Despite the fact that this list isn't a quick read, I haven't heard a single word or thought about it except for Ed Wolfe's comment here. Ed was my first room mate in Vietnam.
I feel compelled to get further into it and focus on three words that were used to describe the reporters that worked during the Johnson Administration. Those three words are: "A compliant media".
I'm not sure if it would do anything at all for me as I already know the answer. I'm not sure if it would do anything for the readers as I've already put out a ton of information and really don't have much of a response column to quote from.
It seems that this subject is so sensitive that there isn't much to be said from the Veterans who still suffer from all the lies and propaganda that came during the sixties and early seventies. I've not made a single Post Debate comment on the Cav site I've been working with, as the end results that prove that we, The Military, didn't lose the war, don't appear to produce a greater understanding of how things ended up as they did.
At the moment, I think I'll invite them to continue with the debate but post my thoughts here and ask them to make the decision to post it there....................or not. Thanks, Eddie.
Monday, September 9, 2013
Erasing a "Mind Set"
The debate I mentioned in the last post has now ended. I spent a ton of time, several days, reviewing articles that I'd studied in the past and included a couple of new ones. For you history freaks, I will include them now.
1. The Rise and Fall of the Japanese Empire.
2. The Paris Peace Accords.
3. The War Powers Act of 1973.
4. The 1954 Geneva Accords.
5. "A Soldier Reports" by William Westmoreland.
6. "LBJ" a book written by 300 staffers from the Johnson Administration.
If you really want to get a grasp of the many different influences that affected or infected the War in Vietnam, you'll have to get all the pertinent information to understand it's intricacies. I have never understood the general population's conclusion the "WE" lost the Vietnam War. I totally understand and completely accept the fact that Saigon fell to the North and that the South Vietnamese no longer had their own Country. From that realization, I'm not in denial about the end result.
That's where my thought process transitioned from a concept where the media always said: "We Lost The Vietnam War" to one that asked the question: "Who is We"?
An in depth analysis to those questions brought about the reading list above. It's my belief that one can not make an intellectual decision without knowing ALL the facts. As I see it now, since the day Saigon fell, the entire main stream media fell into a mind set that regarded "WE" as the United States Military". Nothing could be farther from the truth. You may ask: "How in the world can Tim come up with something like that?". My answer to that question has a very simple answer. It's called "The Truth".
Statistically speaking, even the North Vietnamese don't argue the number of losses they suffered and we don't argue our's. That's a very strong beginning point to identify WHO did what. Wars of Attrition that use the number of men on each side that were killed in action, convert opinions to facts and the facts are quite demonstrable. They lost 1,100,000 killed in action and we lost over 58,000. Any sixth grade math student can give you the results from that statement. It's a 21 to 1 kill ratio. Every death we suffered, the North suffered 21 times that number.
If you categorize each agency, government, document or negotiation into separate categories, it's real clear that the United States Military did NOT lose the war. If you take out the military's participation and plug in the rest of the players, you will soon discover that the military won it big time and the "OTHERS" lost it.
I know it takes a long time to read the books listed above because I've read all of them. You can, however, go to google and type in item 2,3 and 4 above to get a great, quick read that will allow you to get a clean sight picture of the huge puzzle that Vietnam became.
I would suggest a quick review of the Paris Peace Accords and the War Powers Act as a beginning point if you want to find out where the losers are. Speaking as a Vietnam Veteran, let me say that "It ain't us". If you review those items, you will see why I titled this piece as "Erasing a Mind Set".
1. The Rise and Fall of the Japanese Empire.
2. The Paris Peace Accords.
3. The War Powers Act of 1973.
4. The 1954 Geneva Accords.
5. "A Soldier Reports" by William Westmoreland.
6. "LBJ" a book written by 300 staffers from the Johnson Administration.
If you really want to get a grasp of the many different influences that affected or infected the War in Vietnam, you'll have to get all the pertinent information to understand it's intricacies. I have never understood the general population's conclusion the "WE" lost the Vietnam War. I totally understand and completely accept the fact that Saigon fell to the North and that the South Vietnamese no longer had their own Country. From that realization, I'm not in denial about the end result.
That's where my thought process transitioned from a concept where the media always said: "We Lost The Vietnam War" to one that asked the question: "Who is We"?
An in depth analysis to those questions brought about the reading list above. It's my belief that one can not make an intellectual decision without knowing ALL the facts. As I see it now, since the day Saigon fell, the entire main stream media fell into a mind set that regarded "WE" as the United States Military". Nothing could be farther from the truth. You may ask: "How in the world can Tim come up with something like that?". My answer to that question has a very simple answer. It's called "The Truth".
Statistically speaking, even the North Vietnamese don't argue the number of losses they suffered and we don't argue our's. That's a very strong beginning point to identify WHO did what. Wars of Attrition that use the number of men on each side that were killed in action, convert opinions to facts and the facts are quite demonstrable. They lost 1,100,000 killed in action and we lost over 58,000. Any sixth grade math student can give you the results from that statement. It's a 21 to 1 kill ratio. Every death we suffered, the North suffered 21 times that number.
If you categorize each agency, government, document or negotiation into separate categories, it's real clear that the United States Military did NOT lose the war. If you take out the military's participation and plug in the rest of the players, you will soon discover that the military won it big time and the "OTHERS" lost it.
I know it takes a long time to read the books listed above because I've read all of them. You can, however, go to google and type in item 2,3 and 4 above to get a great, quick read that will allow you to get a clean sight picture of the huge puzzle that Vietnam became.
I would suggest a quick review of the Paris Peace Accords and the War Powers Act as a beginning point if you want to find out where the losers are. Speaking as a Vietnam Veteran, let me say that "It ain't us". If you review those items, you will see why I titled this piece as "Erasing a Mind Set".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
