Could the Press Grow a Spine?

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

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"

"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"

Kevin Brooks wrote:

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".

I base this on the fact that, at least in SE Asia, it appears these different
communist elements not only were not capable of cooperating, but in fact
conducted operations against one and other. Vietnam invaded Cambodia in '79, in
response China invade Vietnam. Although the Chinese military action was short
lived (1 month?), Vietnam and China continued to have border skirmishes as late
as the late 80s. China's relatonship with Cambodia has been hot & cold as well.
Really, the only two communist nations in the region to get along were Vietnam
and Laos. Seems to me you need strong alliances to spread any ideology and I'm
not sure these SE Asian nations had that ability.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:

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".

I base this on the fact that, at least in SE Asia, it appears these
different
communist elements not only were not capable of cooperating, but in fact
conducted operations against one and other. Vietnam invaded Cambodia in
'79, in
response China invade Vietnam. Although the Chinese military action was
short
lived (1 month?), Vietnam and China continued to have border skirmishes as
late
as the late 80s. China's relatonship with Cambodia has been hot & cold as
well.
Really, the only two communist nations in the region to get along were
Vietnam
and Laos. Seems to me you need strong alliances to spread any ideology and
I'm
not sure these SE Asian nations had that ability.

All very true, except for maybe that "strong alliances" part. Recall that
Vietnam was being supported by both the USSR and the PRC, even *after* they
had that not-so-little/minor border skirmish between those two nations on
the Amur (1969, IIRC). I guess my point was that had the US not done
anything in Vietnam, it would have left the door open for more adventurous
action (than what was actually experienced) on the part of the USSR and PRC
supporting communist factions in other nearby nations. Hence my reluctance
to accept that the dominos would have stopped falling after Laos, Cambodia,
and the RVN irrespective of whether or not the US demonstrated its
willingness to offer opposition in the region.

Brooks



BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Kevin Brooks wrote:

snip

I guess my point was that had the US not done
anything in Vietnam, it would have left the door open for more adventurous
action (than what was actually experienced) on the part of the USSR and PRC
supporting communist factions in other nearby nations.

Perhaps, but any direct support to communist insurgents in say Thailand would
have required the cooperation (at least in over-flight rights) of both Vietnam
and either Cambodia or Laos and the staging of operations in either Cambodia or
Laos. With Vietnam and Cambodia at "odds", would it have been likely that they
would have had the inclination to support such operations? It may have been
possible, but not certainly as "neat" as the support to NVN and the Pathet Lao
was.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

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,

Yuo mean the CIA's support for the unsuccessful insurgency in Angola? Surely
that went on into the 80's?

John

"John Mullen" wrote:
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

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,

Yuo mean the CIA's support for the unsuccessful insurgency in Angola?
Surely
that went on into the 80's?

B-26's were supposedly flown in operations in the Congo, in the 1960's.
B-26's were used in Angola but I believe the missions where all flown by
members of the FAP.

"Brett" wrote in message
...
"John Mullen" wrote:
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

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,

Yuo mean the CIA's support for the unsuccessful insurgency in Angola?
Surely
that went on into the 80's?

B-26's were supposedly flown in operations in the Congo, in the 1960's.
B-26's were used in Angola but I believe the missions where all flown by
members of the FAP.

Offering facts like that will only confuse him further.

Brooks

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Brett" wrote in message
...
"John Mullen" wrote:
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

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,

Yuo mean the CIA's support for the unsuccessful insurgency in Angola?
Surely
that went on into the 80's?

B-26's were supposedly flown in operations in the Congo, in the 1960's.
B-26's were used in Angola but I believe the missions where all flown by
members of the FAP.

Offering facts like that will only confuse him further.

Hey Brooksy, I always wondered, why do you always sign with your last name?
Are you of noble birth or something?



John