![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
We were sitting at the peace table in Paris with SVN, NVN and the VC.
Minor correction Ed, but I'm 99.9% sure there were no SVN or VC representatives in Paris. But your point was well made. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
By 1972, the table was most assuredly round and all
four parties were involved in the negotiation. According to several books I've read, only the NVN and US were in Paris...at least at the peace accords. As has been earlier mentioned here, one of the stumbling blocks was the unwillingness of Diem regime to concede some of the points agreed to beween the US and NVN. Ed, Ngo Dihn Diem was killed in 1963, the SVN President in 1972 was Nguyen Van Thieu whom the North refused to negotiate with since they claimed his regime was illegitimate. Thieu was notified of agreements in Paris by Henry Kissinger who travelled from Paris to Saigon. He did have issues with many of the agreements, but was not in Paris. As far as I can tell from the dozen or so books I've read on the SE Asia conflict, the SVN and the VC were not in Paris, in fact the NVN argued until the very end that the VC were not North supported or affiliated. NVN claimed the battles in SVN were part of a civil war that both the U.S. and the North should stay out of. Ohh, that's right. Linebacker II was a failure. Ahh...now you're putting words in my mouth. I never said it was a failure. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 17:23:24 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote: Encroaching senility. Meant Thieu. His representative was Le Duc Tho. Omigod....stop me before I kill again. Tho was the NVN delegate. I'm becoming a blithering idiot. (Stop right now, all of you with the confirmation postings....I don't need the reinforcement.) But, here's a googled up quote on the participants: Peace talks between representatives from United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam and the NLF began in Paris in January, 1969. Le Duc Tho served as special adviser to the North Vietnamese delegation. He eventually became North Vietnamese leader in these talks. The real stumbling block at the outset was the legitimacy of the NLF to participate in the talks. With the initial meetings coming shortly after Tet '68, it seems in retrospect that the NLF was a reasonable player for the discussions. The errors of diplomacy, understanding of the Vietnamese culture, the relationship with the PRC and USSR, the low probability of the nuclear escalation, etc. etc. all seem so clear in the light of forty years of settling since the end of hostilities. But, while our mistakes can be analyzed, it still remains difficult to envision what the world would look like with regard to communism had we not "contained" and demonstrated a resolve to resist expansionism--as flawed as we now seem to view the policy. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ed Rasimus wrote:
Peace talks between representatives from United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam and the NLF began in Paris in January, 1969. Wow. I had no idea SVN and NVN ever had a dialogue. Do you know if this arragement continued in 1972 because *every* book on the conflict I have says NVN (and Le Duc Tho in particular) refused to even talk with SVN reps because they claimed their government was illegal? According to the readings, Thieu was informed about negotiations directly from Kissenger. If there were SVN reps in Paris, why would Thieu not get the info from them? But, while our mistakes can be analyzed, it still remains difficult to envision what the world would look like with regard to communism had we not "contained" and demonstrated a resolve to resist expansionism--as flawed as we now seem to view the policy. Very interesting "what if?". With 20/20 hindsight it appears the communist spread in SE Asia was never going to be greater than Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, but what about communist expansion elsewhere like South or Central America? Would Che and his Cuban buddies have had more success in spreading revolution if it appeared to the world that the U.S. was not committed to fighting it? Really no answer to those questions, but interesting historic speculation. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "BUFDRVR" wrote in message ... Ed Rasimus wrote: Peace talks between representatives from United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam and the NLF began in Paris in January, 1969. Wow. I had no idea SVN and NVN ever had a dialogue. Do you know if this arragement continued in 1972 because *every* book on the conflict I have says NVN (and Le Duc Tho in particular) refused to even talk with SVN reps because they claimed their government was illegal? According to the readings, Thieu was informed about negotiations directly from Kissenger. If there were SVN reps in Paris, why would Thieu not get the info from them? But, while our mistakes can be analyzed, it still remains difficult to envision what the world would look like with regard to communism had we not "contained" and demonstrated a resolve to resist expansionism--as flawed as we now seem to view the policy. Very interesting "what if?". With 20/20 hindsight it appears the communist spread in SE Asia was never going to be greater than Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, but what about communist expansion elsewhere like South or Central America? Would Che and his Cuban buddies have had more success in spreading revolution if it appeared to the world that the U.S. was not committed to fighting it? I am not sure your 20/20 hindsight is all that accurate in this case in terms of the observation that the spread was "never going to be greater than Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam". Had there been zero opposition offered in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, can you be assured that other surrounding nations would not have subsequently and quickly come under the gun? Thailand, Burma (I think that is what it was called then, in the pre-Myanmar days...), the PI, Malaysia, etc.? This was an era when Mao was even flirting around with some involvement in the Congo, IIRC; I doubt he would have ignored his own backyard if he detected a complete and utter vacuum in terms of US willingness to offer opposition. Maybe the reason those nations did not face more substantial (or in the Malay case, significantly strengthened) communist threats than they in the end had to actually contend with was because we made the effort to stabilize the Vietnamese situation as we did--who knows? The sixties saw us (read large--the Brits did their share of countering communist moves during this period, IIRC, especially in Malaya) face insurgencies around the world; US "advisors" were apparently involved in helping combat this threat in a fair number of spots outside Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos. ISTR US special forces (and CIA) assets (to include B-26K COIN aircraft) were active in Africa, as well as being involved in supporting the Bolivians' ultimatelly successful hunt for Che Guevera; I believe there was also US covert support being provided to the PI government in their fight against their own communist insurgency. Brooks Really no answer to those questions, but interesting historic speculation. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... On 28 Jun 2004 22:56:48 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote: By 1972, the table was most assuredly round and all four parties were involved in the negotiation. According to several books I've read, only the NVN and US were in Paris...at least at the peace accords. As has been earlier mentioned here, one of the stumbling blocks was the unwillingness of Diem regime to concede some of the points agreed to beween the US and NVN. Ed, Ngo Dihn Diem was killed in 1963, the SVN President in 1972 was Nguyen Van Thieu whom the North refused to negotiate with since they claimed his regime was illegitimate. Encroaching senility. Meant Thieu. His representative was Le Duc Tho. You should have quit when you were ahead, Ed. Look below, or read it and weep: "Le Duc Tho was born in Nam Ha province, Vietnam on 14th October, 1911. As a young man he became involved in radical politics and in 1930 helped establish the Indochinese Communist Party. He campaigned against French rule in Vietnam and was twice imprisoned for his political activities (1930-36 and 1939-44). In 1945 Le Duc Tho returned to Hanoi and joined with Ho Chi Minh and Vo Nguyen Giap in establishing the Vietnam Revolutionary League (Vietminh). Until 1954 he was Vietminh's leader in South Vietnam. A member of the Politburo of the Vietnam Workers' Party, he had responsibility for organizing the rebellion against the government of South Vietnam. Peace talks between representatives from United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam and the NLF began in Paris in January, 1969. Le Duc Tho served as special adviser to the North Vietnamese delegation. He eventually became North Vietnamese leader in these talks." George Z. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "George Z. Bush" wrote in message ... "Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... On 28 Jun 2004 22:56:48 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote: By 1972, the table was most assuredly round and all four parties were involved in the negotiation. According to several books I've read, only the NVN and US were in Paris...at least at the peace accords. As has been earlier mentioned here, one of the stumbling blocks was the unwillingness of Diem regime to concede some of the points agreed to beween the US and NVN. Ed, Ngo Dihn Diem was killed in 1963, the SVN President in 1972 was Nguyen Van Thieu whom the North refused to negotiate with since they claimed his regime was illegitimate. Encroaching senility. Meant Thieu. His representative was Le Duc Tho. You should have quit when you were ahead, Ed. Look below, or read it and weep: Wow. You must have missed Ed's immediate correction that he hisself posted regarding this little history lesson you are offering? Brooks "Le Duc Tho was born in Nam Ha province, Vietnam on 14th October, 1911. As a young man he became involved in radical politics and in 1930 helped establish the Indochinese Communist Party. He campaigned against French rule in Vietnam and was twice imprisoned for his political activities (1930-36 and 1939-44). In 1945 Le Duc Tho returned to Hanoi and joined with Ho Chi Minh and Vo Nguyen Giap in establishing the Vietnam Revolutionary League (Vietminh). Until 1954 he was Vietminh's leader in South Vietnam. A member of the Politburo of the Vietnam Workers' Party, he had responsibility for organizing the rebellion against the government of South Vietnam. Peace talks between representatives from United States, South Vietnam, North Vietnam and the NLF began in Paris in January, 1969. Le Duc Tho served as special adviser to the North Vietnamese delegation. He eventually became North Vietnamese leader in these talks." George Z. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"BUFDRVR" wrote:
By 1972, the table was most assuredly round and all four parties were involved in the negotiation. According to several books I've read, only the NVN and US were in Paris...at least at the peace accords. The peace accords were signed by: FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: William P. Rogers Secretary of State FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF VIET-NAM: Tran Van Lam Minister for Foreign Affairs FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF VIET-NAM: Nguyen Duy Trinh Minister for Foreign Affairs FOR THE PROVISIONAL REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH VIET-NAM: Nguyen Thi Binh Minister for Foreign Affairs |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
30 Jan 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 31st 04 03:55 AM |
11 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | November 11th 03 11:58 PM |
04 Oct 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 4th 03 07:51 PM |
FS: Aviation History Books | Neil Cournoyer | Military Aviation | 0 | August 26th 03 08:32 PM |
07 Aug 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | August 8th 03 02:51 AM |