RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Walloc -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 3:31:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

He deserves the respect of his enemies, just as many laud the efforts of Rommel, Yamamoto or Guderian.




None of the three men you list above used military might to personally direct the brutal slaughter of helpless civilians. One can't say the same for Giap.


Hmmmm, there might be quite a few civilians that might disagree with u on that. All of the 3 fought for regimens that have lots of civilian casulties to their name. Not only that at leased in the case of both Rommel and Guderain units under their command participated in attrocities. Both against civilian as well as enemy combatants.

As for being culprite in that that,i guess the Nuremberg trials said what it thot of that. Agree or disagree in that.

The wehrmacht wasnt with out its fair share of participating in attrocities and in the case of Rommel he had SS units under his command so he is responsible per Nuremberg trials for their actions too, while under his command.

Kind regards,

Rasmus



desicat -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 3:37:50 PM)

quote:

then maybe the population would had been less willing to follow the communists or accept willingly their brutality


I'm not sure this is the point you were trying to make. It does make a good argument for the thoughtfulness of the US founding fathers and the importance of the 2nd Amendment.



desicat -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 3:42:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

He deserves the respect of his enemies, just as many laud the efforts of Rommel, Yamamoto or Guderian.




None of the three men you list above used military might to personally direct the brutal slaughter of helpless civilians. One can't say the same for Giap.


Hmmmm, there might be quite a few civilians that might disagree with u on that. All of the 3 fought for regimens that have lots of civilian casulties to their name. Not only that at leased in the case of both Rommel and Guderain units under their command participated in attrocities. Both against civilian as well as enemy combatants.

As for being culprite in that that,i guess the Nuremberg trials said what it thot of that. Agree or disagree in that.

The wehrmacht wasnt with out its fair share of participating in attrocities and in the case of Rommel he had SS units under his command so he is responsible per Nuremberg trials for their actions too, while under his command.

Kind regards,

Rasmus


I don't normally make a point of trying to defend the foes of freedom as these are the kind of troubled waters one wades into. I suppose it is a matter of degree, as Felton mentioned Giap seems to fit into the Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao in the mass murderer category, while the others fall somewhere lower on the scale in both degree and culpability.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 3:51:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

quote:

then maybe the population would had been less willing to follow the communists or accept willingly their brutality


I'm not sure this is the point you were trying to make. It does make a good argument for the thoughtfulness of the US founding fathers and the importance of the 2nd Amendment.


Pointed that the communist had strong popular support in the South, otherwise, they would had failed.
I am not saying that the vast majority of the population supported them; obviously, there were also millions of people opposing a communist takeover, specially in the cities.



desicat -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 4:05:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury


quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

quote:

then maybe the population would had been less willing to follow the communists or accept willingly their brutality


I'm not sure this is the point you were trying to make. It does make a good argument for the thoughtfulness of the US founding fathers and the importance of the 2nd Amendment.


Pointed that the communist had strong popular support in the South, otherwise, they would had failed.
I am not saying that the vast majority of the population supported them; obviously, there were also millions of people opposing a communist takeover, specially in the cities.


The Viet Kong initially had support in the South but after the Tet Offensive they were a broken and spent force. The utterly rejected further support for the NVA as their betrayal at Tet was unforgivable. The vast majority of the rural population on both sides just wanted to be left alone, as you mentioned the NVA got most of its "support" through brutality.

The South's defeat in 1975 was driven by forces from the outside, it was nothing resembling an internal uprising.



Walloc -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 4:16:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Walloc

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

He deserves the respect of his enemies, just as many laud the efforts of Rommel, Yamamoto or Guderian.




None of the three men you list above used military might to personally direct the brutal slaughter of helpless civilians. One can't say the same for Giap.


Hmmmm, there might be quite a few civilians that might disagree with u on that. All of the 3 fought for regimens that have lots of civilian casulties to their name. Not only that at leased in the case of both Rommel and Guderain units under their command participated in attrocities. Both against civilian as well as enemy combatants.

As for being culprite in that that,i guess the Nuremberg trials said what it thot of that. Agree or disagree in that.

The wehrmacht wasnt with out its fair share of participating in attrocities and in the case of Rommel he had SS units under his command so he is responsible per Nuremberg trials for their actions too, while under his command.

Kind regards,

Rasmus


I don't normally make a point of trying to defend the foes of freedom as these are the kind of troubled waters one wades into. I suppose it is a matter of degree, as Felton mentioned Giap seems to fit into the Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao in the mass murderer category, while the others fall somewhere lower on the scale in both degree and culpability.


It was u and not me that wrote: None of the three men you list above used military might to personally direct the brutal slaughter of helpless civilians. One can't say the same for Giap.

Giap might been higher up the foodchain and the culpatry might there for might be less or more but non teh less im pretty certain he didnt run around doing the warcrimes on his own so his responsibility comes from being in command of units commiting such.
That is no different than in the case of Rommel and Guderain. They had resposibility of what units under their command did. I know there is a certain heroismn factor when it comes to the germans stemming from an awe of the military prowness of the german forces. That IMO shouldnt in any detract from the responsibility of warcrimes that units under their command participated in.

As for Yamamoto im not knowledgeble enough on the japanease command structure to say for certain but while he was and he spend alot of time on Truk. Civilians was abused and mistreated and killed, tho to some japanease these were "volentiers" and as Yamamoto presumable was the highest ranking officier on Truk during atleased some of these times he cant said to be unresponsible for per Nuremberg Trial be unaware of these things happening right under his nose.

Kind regards,

Rasmus



LoBaron -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 5:31:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feltan


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feltan


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron
... In Vietnam was, contrary to WWII, a war far away about something only few understood. It was not a war about the survival of western democracy, or freedom. Thats why Gian succeeded and the US failed.


LoBaron,

After the war, a large number of Vietnamese refugees came to the US. I got to know several, and one with whom I worked is among those that I call my friends.

They would take great exception to your statement that the war was not about western democracy or freedom. South Vietnam was taken over by a communist regime that was as violent and mean to the population as any stories or history that you will read about Genghis Khan and the Mongol hordes. The atrocities were really quite unbelievable, and have (as most periods of atrocities do) faded with time for most people who prefer to remain unaware.


Feltan, important was what it meant to the US public, because that had an impact on how much the US would be able to invest into the defense of ROK. This is what I am referring to.

I never denied that it was a matter of pure survival for the ROK, not that it changed a thing.


LoBaron,

In common usage, ROK usually is an abbreviation for Republic of Korea (i.e. South Korea).

That being said, I will agree that the conflict in South Vietnam was not viewed as vital to the survival of the U.S., and the American commitment level to the war did not compare to WWII. In fact, nothing has come close to the commitment level of WWII. Currently, while the US military is engaged overseas the population is not engaged. I would go further, and say most are simply unaware of what is going on. Most don't personally know anyone overseas, and it doesn't affect their daily lives in the least.

Regards,
Feltan


Oooops got two mixed up there. Obviously I was referring to South Vietnam, not South Korea. Thanks Feltan!



crsutton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 5:37:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feltan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury
In that case, the "thug" was Ho Chi Minh. And excluding Ghandi's, was there any other independence movement not using force to implement political change?



Ho and Giap were two peas in a pod. They had different roles, but Ho was not disconnected from the military, and Giap was not disconnected from politics. They had similar culpability.

Independence movements tend to be more brutal than nation-states going to war, and I would think that the use of force is generally implied. However, the scale of that brutality and force differs, and when one considers if someone is "great" the manner in which force is used I think warrants close scrutiny.

Regards,
Feltan


For the record the majority of people who died in Vietnam, North and South died at the hand of American and South Vietnamese forces. This would include a substantial number of non-combatants estimated at one third to a half of all deaths in North Vietnam and a smaller percentage in South Vietnam where most of the actual fighting took place. This reflects the greater firepower of the Americans more than anything else. As for atrocities there can be no doubt about the North's atrocities as there is also little doubt about the whole scale demoncide killings by the government of the South during the war. You have to remember that the was was a Civil War more than anything else and that type of war can be the most brutal with the most radical elements eventually taking power resulting in the total loss of moderation. (Thucydides 101). I find it short sighted to make statements incriminating one side when the other side was just a culpable. And yes, to a lesser degree US forces were at times also guilty of crimes against humanity during this conflict. I don't think there can be much argument against the evidence that we now have for this. Atrocities are simply a product of war. Likewise I have always found it a bit odd to talk of one method of death in warfare as brutal as if all the other horrible ways of killing are more sanitary or humane. Let's be real here. If the dead could voice an opinion, do you think that many of them would really care how they died in a conflict?

I am not really going to try and defend right or wrong in a conflict such as Vietnam. However, it bugs me how so many people want to come up with simplistic explanation and theories about a conflict that was incredibly complex and had roots that went back to well before the turn of the century. To attempt to explain this conflict that predates rise of Communism as solely a Cold War event is short sited in my opinion. Quite frankly the social and civil upheaval that the Vietnamese were undergoing had very little to do with the coinciding conflict between the US, China and the Soviet Union. And, I doubt you will find many Vietnamese today that won't agree with that. Let me just say that I am not trying to be critical of my fellow posters here. I have spent a good deal of my life studying this "signature event" in my life and will be the first to admit that there are still gaps in my knowledge and that I have gotten a lot wrong over the years.

But it bugs me when the debate just runs over the same old myths and half truths about the war that get stirred up whenever a discussion like this starts.

On a constructive side. For those who have an interest in this subject and want to know more. I suggest you start by watching the excellent documentary on Robert McNamara called "Fog of War." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkQk50qtTwo A brilliant man and a key player in the war. I also recommend Neil Sheehan's "A Bright Shining Lie"-a history of the war that reads like a novel and sees the war through the eyes of one of it's true heroes, John Paul Vann. There are countless other excellent sources on the war and I urge others to make some recommendations here

On a personal note to Desicat. Perhaps I am off base but I took your original remarks not to be a benign comment on proper protocol but a critical remark aimed at the current administration, and still read it that way. I got no problem with your opinion on this, I have to listen to my wife on this subject every day. However, I do fully believe that statements like this tend to be inflammatory and have no place in this forum. I hope that you see what I am saying. Let's debate about Giap and the Vietnam War but not about president Obama here.



desicat -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 5:50:23 PM)

quote:

On a personal note to Desicat. Perhaps I am off base but I took your original remarks not to be a benign comment on proper protocol but a critical remark aimed at the current administration, and still read it that way. I got no problem with your opinion on this, I have to listen to my wife on this subject every day. However, I do fully believe that statements like this tend to be inflammatory and have no place in this forum. I hope that you see what I am saying. Let's debate about Giap and the Vietnam War but not about president Obama here.


I fully expect that the US will have someone attend this funeral as it is in the national interest to continue working with Vietnam and the rest of the Indo-Chinese nations to counter balance Chinese expansion into the South China Sea and the Spratley Islands. I intended no ill will to the President with my comment, but I did find it ironic that Sec State Kerry could end up attending.



crsutton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 6:05:46 PM)

From Robert McNamara's 1995 book "In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam".[8]

1.We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries … and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions.
2.We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience … We totally misjudged the political forces within the country.
3.We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values.
4.Our misjudgments of friend and foe, alike, reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders.
5.We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces, and doctrine. We failed, as well, to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture.
6.We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement … before we initiated the action.
7.After the action got under way, and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course … we did not fully explain what was happening, and why we were doing what we did.
8.We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people's or country's best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.
9.We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action … should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community.
10.We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions … At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world.
11.Underlying many of these errors lay our failure to organize the top echelons of the executive branch to deal effectively with the extraordinarily complex range of political and military issues.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 6:05:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

I fully expect that the US will have someone attend this funeral as it is in the national interest to continue working with Vietnam and the rest of the Indo-Chinese nations to counter balance Chinese expansion into the South China Sea and the Spratley Islands. I intended no ill will to the President with my comment, but I did find it ironic that Sec State Kerry could end up attending.


The photo included in my paper's story on his death was of Robert McNamara and Giap sitting in rattan chairs drinking tea and discussing the war when both were very elderly. Both were smiling. Time, and the world, moves on.

Giap was a lawyer. He had no formal military training. He was fundamentally a politician and revolutionary, not a soldier. I join with crsutton in arguing that Vietnam can only be understood if one looks deep into its history. That history did not begin in 1964 as many Americans seem to believe. No more than Afghanistan's began in 2001. The events post-1975 were largely a result of forces unleashed by Western behaviors in the 1945-1975 period, primarily US and French behaviors, but also the UN's. If the West had fulfilled promises made to Ho Chi Minh in the immediate post-war era the history of Vietnam would have been far different, and far more peaceful. But those promises violated a worldview held by the Western powers in light of Soviet and Chinese immediate post-war actions as well as France's desire to return to the status quo ante.



LoBaron -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 6:08:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

quote:

Personally I think he was a good enough general. He became great because he commanded an army willing to take unbelievable losses and accept an extreme ammount of atrocities for a higher cause, and a population that either supported such sacrifices or did not know about them, and faught against an opponent who was not equally dedicated. Similar tactics had already failed when employed by the Japanese against the Allies after the US war machine had switched into full gear.

In Vietnam was, contrary to WWII, a war far away about something only few understood. It was not a war about the survival of western democracy, or freedom. Thats why Gian succeeded and the US failed.


This is revisionist history. To say that the US was not dedicated to victory during the war years is ludicrous on its face. How in the world did 500,000 troops get into Vietnam in the first place? What in the world was the vast majority of the Pacific Navy doing off Yankee station? How much blood and treasure was expended in these efforts?


Please reread my post and respond to what is written in my post. I have no interest to debate your personal interpretation of what I have not written but might have intended to write.

That noone enters a war without dedication to victory is a no brainer. That the willingness of a countries´ population to accept losses, cope with the costs, and continue the war effort, varies from country to country and from conflict to conflict, is a no brainer as well. If think it important to discuss the correctness two above statements you are talking to the wrong person.

quote:

To claim that the vast majority of the population supported the NVA or was ambivalent is also totally untrue. The NVA population control tactics can easily be compared to those used by the Taliban or Al Queda in Syria. In many cases it was pure intimidation backed up by rape, torture, and murder.


You seem to think that support driven by fear and intimidation is not support. I claimed they supported the NVA, not that they did so because of love and fluffy pink elephants...


quote:


Ho and Giap failed in their efforts to win the war through force of arms or by "swaying" the Vietnamese people to their side. The US military partnering with the ARVN won the military conflict - period. South Vietnam was lost when the political leaders in Congress failed to live up to their treaty obligations in 1975. US air power would have blunted the NVA invasion in 1975.


Strange, I always thought that a war is won with the surrender of the enemy and an agreement of ceasefire terms beneficial to the victorious side.

South Vietnam was lost when the term 'Vietnamization' was invented by Nixon as an euphemism for getting the US ground troops out of Vietnam. From there on the only question was when.



desicat -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 6:37:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

I fully expect that the US will have someone attend this funeral as it is in the national interest to continue working with Vietnam and the rest of the Indo-Chinese nations to counter balance Chinese expansion into the South China Sea and the Spratley Islands. I intended no ill will to the President with my comment, but I did find it ironic that Sec State Kerry could end up attending.


The photo included in my paper's story on his death was of Robert McNamara and Giap sitting in rattan chairs drinking tea and discussing the war when both were very elderly. Both were smiling. Time, and the world, moves on.

Giap was a lawyer. He had no formal military training. He was fundamentally a politician and revolutionary, not a soldier. I join with crsutton in arguing that Vietnam can only be understood if one looks deep into its history. That history did not begin in 1964 as many Americans seem to believe. No more than Afghanistan's began in 2001. The events post-1975 were largely a result of forces unleashed by Western behaviors in the 1945-1975 period, primarily US and French behaviors, but also the UN's. If the West had fulfilled promises made to Ho Chi Minh in the immediate post-war era the history of Vietnam would have been far different, and far more peaceful. But those promises violated a worldview held by the Western powers in light of Soviet and Chinese immediate post-war actions as well as France's desire to return to the status quo ante.


A good book that provides some the background that you refer to is The Communist Road to Power in Vietnam. This book is used in some of the War Colleges to provide context and background to this era. It starts in the early 1900's with the rise of the Revolutionary Movement and works its way forward. Very interesting and intricate stuff involving numerous world powers and movements.



t001001001 -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 6:55:56 PM)


Tactically the US slaughtered giap's army at practically every contact.

Strategically, the US was not militarily compelled to leave Viet Nam.

I wouldn't piss on the man's grave, and he must have been fairly competent to be where he was. I don't know if I'd credit him w/ defeating the US via brilliant tactics and strategery though.



Jorge_Stanbury -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 7:31:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: t001001001

I don't know if I'd credit him w/ defeating the US via brilliant tactics and strategery though.


He brilliantly defeatead the French at Dien Bien Phu. He also defeated the Republic of Vietnam after the US withrdrawal

There was not a single battle in the entire war, that ended with any other outcome than defeat for the communist, this as long as the US was part of the equation.
Conversely, when the US was not around, South Vietnam's defeats were very common.
Outrageous defeats against weaker, less numerous foes was the trademark of the ARVN



witpqs -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 8:35:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


Oooops got two mixed up there. Obviously I was referring to South Vietnam, not South Korea. Thanks Feltan!

BTW, the acronym that I've seen used is ARVN (Army of the Republic of Vietnam), vs NVA (North Vietnamese Army).



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 9:43:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

A good book that provides some the background that you refer to is The Communist Road to Power in Vietnam. This book is used in some of the War Colleges to provide context and background to this era. It starts in the early 1900's with the rise of the Revolutionary Movement and works its way forward. Very interesting and intricate stuff involving numerous world powers and movements.


The Amazon listing is short on reviews, but he looks like he has the credentials to write with authority on the subject. Penn State has a good history department.

I'd go back a lot farther than 1900, but certainly that is a better place to start than 1945, 1956, or 1964 with the Tonkin Gulf Resolution.

I sometimes wonder what modern Americans would be willing to do, and what organizations they would be willing to join, if we were a colony of another nation with which we did not share an ethnic or religious history. The war we did have for our freedom was vicious enough when we shared those traits.



GaryChildress -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 10:50:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

quote:

Personally I think he was a good enough general. He became great because he commanded an army willing to take unbelievable losses and accept an extreme ammount of atrocities for a higher cause, and a population that either supported such sacrifices or did not know about them, and faught against an opponent who was not equally dedicated. Similar tactics had already failed when employed by the Japanese against the Allies after the US war machine had switched into full gear.

In Vietnam was, contrary to WWII, a war far away about something only few understood. It was not a war about the survival of western democracy, or freedom. Thats why Gian succeeded and the US failed.


This is revisionist history. To say that the US was not dedicated to victory during the war years is ludicrous on its face. How in the world did 500,000 troops get into Vietnam in the first place? What in the world was the vast majority of the Pacific Navy doing off Yankee station? How much blood and treasure was expended in these efforts?


Like most people in the world, the US population was only willing to support the war so long as it perceived it as a just war. Very few educated people believed in victory at all costs regardless of the morality of the war. As we know toward the end there was significant opposition to the just war view and therefore many in the US withdrew their support or were otherwise hard pressed to keep it up. So, no, the US was not dedicated to victory during the entire war. If the population was as dedicated to victory as it had been in WWII, North Vietnam would have collapsed in a month. Or was Giap so cunning and shrewd that he could have stopped an all out US offensive against the North?

Also, please notice I'm not here arguing the veracity of one side or the other of the political spectrum on the Vietnam War, only that the US population was NOT committed to victory (especially not anywhere comparable to WWII) due to its perception of the war.



fcharton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 11:17:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
A first rate soldier. One of the best that the century has produced.


French POWs during the Indochina War would probably disagree with you. Viet Minh prisoner camps were among the worst in a century where lots of POWs were mistreated, and Giap had a pretty direct responsibility in this. Fine soldier, sure, first rate?

Francois



LoBaron -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 11:33:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
On a constructive side. For those who have an interest in this subject and want to know more. I suggest you start by watching the excellent documentary on Robert McNamara called "Fog of War." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkQk50qtTwo A brilliant man and a key player in the war.


Thank you for that link crsutton! I have always been impressed by the ideological changes this man went through in the last two decades of his life. A great personality and thinker.



slinkytwf -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/5/2013 11:51:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
A first rate soldier. One of the best that the century has produced.


French POWs during the Indochina War would probably disagree with you. Viet Minh prisoner camps were among the worst in a century where lots of POWs were mistreated, and Giap had a pretty direct responsibility in this. Fine soldier, sure, first rate?

Francois



Perhaps he learned the finer points from the colonial French and Imperial Japanese occupiers.



Dili -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 12:03:34 AM)

quote:

To attempt to explain this conflict that predates rise of Communism as solely a Cold War event is short sited in my opinion.


It was the Cold War that gave its intensity.

Giap was a thug, and i am not even saying this talking about civilians, but about own troops. Like Zhukov he could waste own soldiers.

quote:

Perhaps he learned the finer points from the colonial French and Imperial Japanese occupiers.


Civilian people, Boat People? Millions get out of Vietnam after the war. So it seems there is indeed something worse than war.

As final note. Most american causalities was from mines and traps.
Which today are considered almost outside the law of warfare by the Progressives i.e. those that supported the Communists.
And no one is interested to do an assessment how many Vietnamese civilians those killed. Which is another testimony of what today Universities are.




fcharton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 8:31:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slinkytwf
Perhaps he learned the finer points from the colonial French and Imperial Japanese occupiers.


And this would make him a first rate soldier, or justify his conduct?

Mistreatment of POWs is one "flaw" on a military career most armies would agree upon. It did happen, and will happen again, but its systematic use is not in the repertoire of a "great warrior", no matter the political excuses.

Francois



bigred -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 1:42:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


quote:

ORIGINAL: desicat

I fully expect that the US will have someone attend this funeral as it is in the national interest to continue working with Vietnam and the rest of the Indo-Chinese nations to counter balance Chinese expansion into the South China Sea and the Spratley Islands. I intended no ill will to the President with my comment, but I did find it ironic that Sec State Kerry could end up attending.


The photo included in my paper's story on his death was of Robert McNamara and Giap sitting in rattan chairs drinking tea and discussing the war when both were very elderly. Both were smiling. Time, and the world, moves on.

Giap was a lawyer. He had no formal military training. He was fundamentally a politician and revolutionary, not a soldier. I join with crsutton in arguing that Vietnam can only be understood if one looks deep into its history. That history did not begin in 1964 as many Americans seem to believe. No more than Afghanistan's began in 2001. The events post-1975 were largely a result of forces unleashed by Western behaviors in the 1945-1975 period, primarily US and French behaviors, but also the UN's. If the West had fulfilled promises made to Ho Chi Minh in the immediate post-war era the history of Vietnam would have been far different, and far more peaceful. But those promises violated a worldview held by the Western powers in light of Soviet and Chinese immediate post-war actions as well as France's desire to return to the status quo ante.

IIRC Degaulle and Churchill had a meeting and France wanted Vietnam returned to France as a colony after WW2. This irked the americans who had promissed HoChiMinh independance and a united veitnam for fighting the Japs in a guerrilla war. Again, IIRC Churchill had some reason he was forced to let the French reoccupy Vietnam, but I dont remember why, some kind of deal.
In 1982 I was a second Lt sitting in the O Club in Korea telling this story to my Battalion commander. I explained that from HoChiMinh POV he was fighting a war of liberation. My Bn Co got pissed off and told me I was wrong with my data. He said something about the domino effect. He had been in Vietnam. Today I can recall the pain in his face as his memories were still fresh in his mind.

Today I see it is a hard sell to an American soldier to intercede into a "war of Liberation" as we Americans fought our own war of liberation against the English. It is much easier to justify American war by using terms like "Domino effect". I am sure from our stategic POV it was a Domino effect strategy.

Many years later this struck me as oddly placed but related...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDkYThhzDw



Terminus -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 1:46:16 PM)

Giap did not die in a free Vietnam, he died in an independent Vietnam.



fcharton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 2:25:18 PM)

Hi Bigred,

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred
IIRC Degaulle and Churchill had a meeting and France wanted Vietnam returned to France as a colony after WW2. This irked the americans who had promissed HoChiMinh independance and a united veitnam for fighting the Japs in a guerrilla war. Again, IIRC Churchill had some reason he was forced to let the French reoccupy Vietnam, but I dont remember why, some kind of deal.


The British had a colonial empire they intended to keep after the war, as did the French. Besides, de Gaulle had just as good a claim at having fought the Axis as Ho. So basically, the British and the French wanted the restoration of a status quo ex ante, whereas the americans saw the end of the war as an opportunity to decolonize, and remodel the area (not unlike the US position over Europe after WWI, note).

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred
I explained that from HoChiMinh POV he was fighting a war of liberation. My Bn Co got pissed off and told me I was wrong with my data. He said something about the domino effect. He had been in Vietnam. Today I can recall the pain in his face as his memories were still fresh in his mind.


I think you're right saying Ho fought a war of liberation against the French. This war resulted in Vietnam becoming independant, and partitioned. The second war, aka the Vietnam war (the one your CO was in) is a consequence of it, but a different beast.

Francois




crsutton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 3:24:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
A first rate soldier. One of the best that the century has produced.


French POWs during the Indochina War would probably disagree with you. Viet Minh prisoner camps were among the worst in a century where lots of POWs were mistreated, and Giap had a pretty direct responsibility in this. Fine soldier, sure, first rate?

Francois



Ummm...Once again you are laying a lil bit o history on us as a justification for an argument. No doubt the Vietnamese both North and South had a horrible record on human rights. I can't imagine the horror of life in the Hanoi Hilton. However, if you delve a little deeper you will find that of all the colonial masters, the French were about as brutal and exploitative as they come. You make no mention of the French Colonial penal system which leads me to believe that you are not aware of it. It is a good idea to check this out before you start pointing the finger at Vietnamese treatment of prisoners. This is by no means a justification of brutality but your example does not hold water because it just cannot stand on it own.

Forgive me, I really am sounding blunt and am not trying to pick on you. But this is my point in my previous post. Your opinion about Giap is valid and reasonable. It is just the way that you support it.



fcharton -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 4:38:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
However, if you delve a little deeper you will find that of all the colonial masters, the French were about as brutal and exploitative as they come. You make no mention of the French Colonial penal system which leads me to believe that you are not aware of it. It is a good idea to check this out before you start pointing the finger at Vietnamese treatment of prisoners. This is by no means a justification of brutality but your example does not hold water because it just cannot stand on it own.


I'm sorry, but I think you're confusing two different things.

No one disputes that French colonial rule was harsh, just like pretty much everyone agrees that democratic vietnam might not have been paradise on earth. But this has nothing to do with Giap (or anyone's) military career, which is what you refer to when you call him a 'first rate soldier'.

In other words, we're not discussing the causes he fought for, or against, but his job, and the treatment of POWs was part of it (whereas boat people, or treatment of civilians, weren't).

Somehow, my question to you would be "can you call a first rate soldier someone who condoned, and perhaps even encouraged, the systematic abuse of prisoners of war?" You seem to reply "yes, because the regime he was fighting against was bad enough", and I think we disagree on this point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Forgive me, I really am sounding blunt and am not trying to pick on you.


I trust you, even though I do think that if I had not signed Francois, but Bill, or better still Nguyen, you would have reacted differently.

Francois



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 6:05:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

IIRC Degaulle and Churchill had a meeting and France wanted Vietnam returned to France as a colony after WW2. This irked the americans who had promissed HoChiMinh independance and a united veitnam for fighting the Japs in a guerrilla war. Again, IIRC Churchill had some reason he was forced to let the French reoccupy Vietnam, but I dont remember why, some kind of deal.
In 1982 I was a second Lt sitting in the O Club in Korea telling this story to my Battalion commander. I explained that from HoChiMinh POV he was fighting a war of liberation. My Bn Co got pissed off and told me I was wrong with my data. He said something about the domino effect. He had been in Vietnam. Today I can recall the pain in his face as his memories were still fresh in his mind.

Today I see it is a hard sell to an American soldier to intercede into a "war of Liberation" as we Americans fought our own war of liberation against the English. It is much easier to justify American war by using terms like "Domino effect". I am sure from our stategic POV it was a Domino effect strategy.

Many years later this struck me as oddly placed but related...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDkYThhzDw


Britain occupied Saigon immediately after WWII to disarm the Japanese remnants and France came right behind them. Bao Dai was re-installed. Truman supported France (lightly) in the 45-50 period, inserting the first US military advisors in 1950. The first war, with France, began and France was defeated despite US aid. In 1954 the Geneva Accords promised Ho popular elections in 1956 to determine if a unified Vietnam would emerge. The US and South Vietnam, as always a Western puppet government, did not agree with Geneva and by 1956 South Vietnam refused to hold the elections as Ho would certainly have won. The second war began in the midst of huge internal migrations of Catholics south, and VM supporters north.

The Domino Theory was an artifact of the early Cold War period, widely written about by theorists who believed in an "international Communist conspiracy led from Moscow." We know now how much animosity there was between Moscow and Peking, for example. Hardly a monolith. In retrospect communism was an interim step between colonialism and capitalism, an evolution still underway. But after 1975, when communism triumphed in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, but did not spread to Burma, Indonesia, or India, the domino theory died a quiet death in the West. Americans of a certain age can remember right-wing claims of "We have to beat them in Vietnam or else they'll be landing on the beaches at San Diego!" But by the early 80s for a mid-grade military officer to still believe in the Domino Theory shows a lot of cement in his world-view.

The video from The Godfather Part II is a classic. Castro lives, Cuba is far more prosperous than it was under Batista, and continues to evolve economically and socially. In twenty years it will be an exploding economic region in the western hemisphere, and communism will be in the history books.



Symon -> RE: Vo Nguyen Giap, cold war warrior, passed away (10/6/2013 6:42:05 PM)

Geopolitical considerations don’t have much to do with whether someone’s a good general or not. I believe, Vo Nguyen Giap was a good general. He was neither a tactical nor strategic “genius”, simply a good general who did what he could with what he had at hand.

I call him good because we were the 9000lb gorilla. We were tactically superior; we had fire, mobility, support and supply superiority and controlled the airspace. We were operationally superior in that we could go where we wanted, with what we wanted, when we wanted.

In the face of the disproportionate scale of superiority (and consequent casualties), Vo Nguyen Giap was able to maintain the organization and morale of his troops for yet one more ‘push’. THAT is the mark of a good general. Probably his only claim to tactical/operational fame, is his decision to break down his artillery and manually hump it to the heights above Dien Bien Phu. Sure surprised Hell out of de Castries, yeah?

Served two tours, first in II Corps in Pleiku and Kontum, second in III Corps in Long Khanh, Binh Duong and Long Anh, spanning 1969-1971. Been there, saw it. Have a second navel in my right thigh and some nice dueling scars just left of my left eye.

Don’t like him, don’t hate him, don’t think much about him, but he was a player and believed in what he was doing. His nation honors him as a hero, okey doke. I understand why. But he sure as heck wasn’t some kind of military genius. He was a “good” general. And I respect that..

[ed] There's some people, whose troops I did my best to kill, whose funeral I would I would not consider myself dimished by attending. So a digital white rose to the %L*I of Vo Nguten Giap.
Ciao. JWE



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.859375