Iraqi Village Disappears....Where did the People Go?

[andyfox]

"The Viet Cong strategy was to terrorize the people into cooperating."

Here is what a hamlet chief, appointed by the Diem government, the government we supported, said about his village in 1959:

"The Vietcong were very smart. If they knew that Binh's family had been ill-treated by the government, they would work on that weak point. Perhaps Binh had had money extorted by an official--in his heart he had to feel resentment. So they would come by from time to time and say, "You see how bad the government is, it calls itself nationalist, but in the end it steals your money . Are you just going to do nothing?" So, like fanning a flame, Binh's resentment would grow to anger, and his anger to hatred, and his hatred to revolt. Or maybe Xoai would be building a house. The Vietcong would come by and help him put it up, meanwhile talking about their life--no pay, living in the swamps, being shot at all the time. Naturally, Xoai would take pity on them, so the next time they came by and asked for a meal, he would invite them in. But when they took a meal it was not like our soldiers' way: burst in, demand food, sit around while it was being fixed, eat, and finally grab a couple of chickens and run off. Instead, the VC would go into the kitchen, clean the rice, and while they were waiting for it to cook, they would sweep the house, wash the dishes, and set the table. When the meal was over, they would clean up, and then thank everyone politely. So the owner of the house would think, 'The [government] soldiers come in here as if they owned the place, but this other fellow is very polite and helps me out'. Naturally, he let the Vietcong eat at his house all the time. That is how the Vietcong gained the people's support. They simply built on the opportunity we gave them."

A government National Assembly candidate:

"The election was very dishonest. Information and Civic Action cadres went around at noon when everyone was home napping and stuffed the ballot boxes. If the results still didn't come out right they were adjusted at district headquarters. [Didn't anyone complain?] Everyone was terrified of the government. For example, the principal of the local school failed to campaign "actively" for the government candidate. He was reprimanded severely and transferred somewhere else, and his family got in a lot of trouble too. [Was there torture?] Of course there was. The Cong An beat people and used the 'water treatment'. [The "water treatment" consisted of forcing water down a person's throat or else holding his head under water.] But there was nothing anyone could do. Everyone was too terrified."



"We know which technique was more effective."

Indeed.

[GoodCallYouWin]

What about about bombing South Vietnam in 1952 at the behest of the French was intended to win their hearts and minds?

[Felix_Nietzsche]

I assume your point is the Vietcong sometimes used the carrot instead the whip.
If you are trying to portray the Vietcong as angels that never used murder and terror to gain cooperation....then you are mistaken.

The mass executions after the invasion of Hue showed the true colors of the Vietcong.

[andyfox]

Yes, I'm trying to portray the Communist as angels. Very perceptive.

C'mon, Felix. Your point was that the terrorism of the Communists was what was instrumental in winning the war. That's just nonsense. And it was such nonsense that led us to fight that war in such an ignorant manner, and to support our own brand of thugs that often terrorized the population, as well as using terorist tactics ourselves. That, to me, is the thing that seems to be what is relevant to our incompetency in Iraq now: an ignorance and an hubris that bodes ill for our venture there and for the people of Iraq.

[Nielsio]

OP,

Are you somehow trying to skew the fact that America is the aggressor here? That America is the bad guy? That America is the one who is traveling halfway around the world to invade and occupy another country?


First you must look at the actions of your 'own' soldiers before you have the right to speak about others'.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]

If you are trying to portray the Vietcong as angels that never used murder and terror to gain cooperation....then you are mistaken.


[/ QUOTE ]


if you are trying to portray the US as never using murder or terror to gain cooperation....then you are mistaken.

dropping the bomb?
cia interventions?
illegal wars?
sponsoring and supporting various radical insurgencies and regimes overtime?
threatening genocide against Iran?

[Felix_Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
dropping the bomb?
cia interventions?
illegal wars?
sponsoring and supporting various radical insurgencies and regimes overtime?
threatening genocide against Iran?

[/ QUOTE ]

A-Bomb:
Based on Japanese executions of American prisoners they should consider themselves lucky we did not drop 100 A-bombs. Payback is a bitch..... I do think the bombing of Dresden was a warcrime. The difference is the Germans for the most part honored the rules-of-war with the AMERICAN army(obviousy not with the Russians). But since Japan initiated systematic war crimes against the USA, then the USA was justified to retaliate with compound interest.... According to Adm Eliot Morrison's book on the battles in the Pacific, many US sailors stopped taking Japanese prisoners because their surrenders were largely a ruse to murder US servicemen. After a Japanese transport was sunk, US sailors would typically machine gun the surviving enemy troops in the water. As Tom Brokaw said, 'This was America's GREATEST generation'. They were just with honorable enemies and merciless with dishonorable enemies. Arabs/Pakistani/Persians are dishonorable enemies.....so I think the USA is justified in using more extreme methods against them.

CIA:
Ahhh...the good old days. Today's CIA is pathetic.

Illegal Wars:
Not sure what you are talking about. If congress authorizes the funds for a war, then it is legal. Only congress has the power to authorize war. The American people elect their congressman.

Sponsoring dictatorships/insurgences:
Nothing wrong with this. Sometimes you must choose between the lesser of two evils. If we can topple an evil regime and replace it with a less evil regime, then the world becomes a better place. Fighting communism was our main goal the last 50 years. Since communism has resulted in the deaths of 100+million people....then I think this money was well spent. Otherwise there would have been double the deaths....

Threatening genocide against Iran:
I have not heard of this officially. I have heard Iran threaten Israel with genocide. I have heard a Chi-Com general threaten the genocide of the Western USA should the USA honor their military alliance with Taiwan. I would like to see Iran bombed for their support of the insurgents in Iraq... If Iran uses a nuke against the USA/Israel then they will deserve destruction.....

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]


A-Bomb:
Based on Japanese executions of American prisoners they should consider themselves lucky we did not drop 100 A-bombs. Payback is a bitch..... I do think the bombing of Dresden was a warcrime. The difference is the Germans for the most part honored the rules-of-war with the AMERICAN army(obviousy not with the Russians). But since Japan initiated systematic war crimes against the USA, then the USA was justified to retaliate with compound interest.... According to Adm Eliot Morrison's book on the battles in the Pacific, many US sailors stopped taking Japanese prisoners because their surrenders were largely a ruse to murder US servicemen. After a Japanese transport was sunk, US sailors would typically machine gun the surviving enemy troops in the water. As Tom Brokaw said, 'This was America's GREATEST generation'. They were just with honorable enemies and merciless with dishonorable enemies. Arabs/Pakistani/Persians are dishonorable enemies.....so I think the USA is justified in using more extreme methods against them.


[/ QUOTE ]

Even if all your contentions about America/Japan are true, since some are disputable, how does this justify them killing tens of thousand of innocent civilians?

I thought the difference between us and them was that they dont value life but we do?

Is Osama bin Laden justified in killing American civilians for US persecution and meddling within the Arabian peninsula?

ill get to some other points after you address this.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
Sponsoring dictatorships/insurgences:
Nothing wrong with this. Sometimes you must choose between the lesser of two evils. If we can topple an evil regime and replace it with a less evil regime, then the world becomes a better place.

[/ QUOTE ]


wow