Did anti-war protestors actually PROLONG the VietNam War?

auzerais

[auzerais]

On Hannity and Colmes tonight, Alan Colmes, again, tried to make the point that the anti-war protestors somehow 'shortened the Vietnam war'.
I had always understood that NorthVietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap had written in his 1985 memoir that, because the 1968 Tet Offensive had been such a disaster for the VietCong, he was ready to sue for peace and end the war. However, because the anti-war demonstrations were truly getting massive in the US at that point, it gave Hanoi just enough hope that if he continued fighting, Hanoi would eventually win [with the help of the anti-US/pro-Hanoi demonstrations, of course]. Thus it can be argued that the anti-war movement actually PROLONGED the Vietnam war and caused an extra 15,000 US deaths.

I know that this is a somewhat matter of opinion and debate, but where can one find Gen. Giap's words (or memoir) to verify this?

[auzerais]

I tried doing a search of Giap and anti-war demonstrations, but couldn't come up with anything.

With Kerry now claiming that he and his anti-war group "helped end the Vietnam War", it may be the time to re-open this debate and get some clarity for ourselves and especially talkshow hosts to counter the leftists' claims.

[quantim]

Yes, see tagline.

[LibFreeOrDie]

At www.stolenhonor.com/documentary/samples.asp, look at the video clip of James Warner, POW (at bottom of page) for his thoughts on this.

[highlander_UW]

I don't recall how to do a link, but here's an article on the topic you're asking about... http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/10/222651.shtml

[Army Air Corps]

Kerry and his group, VVAW, helped colour public opinion against the war. We had made promises to support the Republic of Vietnam, but Kerry, et al made Vietnam such a hot potato that Congress decided not to fund the Republic of Vietnam. The Northern regime, however, was supported by both the PRC and USSR. Without political, economic, and military support, the RVN collapsed when the the Northern regime invaded. When they had only a few month's worth of supplies and POL reserves, the handwriting was on the wall. The oppression of the South rests on the head of Kerry and his fellow travelers.

[highlander_UW]

guess I did better with the link than I thought.

[Thane_Banquo]

The groups pro-longed the war, and helped bring about our loss, by tying up American military resources at home (to quell violent demonstrations and to prevent more complaining about troops being deployed) and making a big political fuss whenever the Johnson or Nixon administration tried to do anything to help bring the war to a successful end.

[Army Air Corps]

The invasion to which I made reference was the 1975 campaign.

[TheLion]

Only liberals can try and twist Un-American activity into something positive.

[HamiltonJay]

Of course it helped prolong the war, Generals from North Korea have stated not only that it prolonged the war, but his (Kerry's) words and actions helped them win the war. Yes, there are N. Korean generals on the Record stating that the N. was losing the war, and they had no chance of winning and that Kerry's comments before Congress were the turning point that allowed them to win.

Kerry is a Turncoat and a traitor, period.


I think someone needs to spit in Kerry's face and call him a Baby Killer sometime during this campaign so he can taste a bit of his own medicine.

[Bobibutu]

Well said - I was in-country from '66-'69 and in SEA till '76 - we kicked their a$$ even with our hands tied.

And then Mr. Kerry gave them what they needed.

[spunkets]

See this thread.

they did 2 more mini tets and had to use NVA to work VC duty, because they were essentially destroyed as an effective fighting force. It would have ended with their defeat, or surrender soon after that had the leftists in the US not aided the N by forcing troop reductions and severely limiting actions taken against the invading N.

The statement you're looking for is Lt Col O. North's summarization of Giap's conclusions based on an NVA gen staff col's validation in his '86 book.

[snooker]

I think the general conclusion that can be drawn is that the Viet Cong figured if they could kill as many GIs as possible, hold on as long as they could, the US would fold and they would win. They bet the farm on the anti-war types to win the war for them. With Kerry, Fonda and the media, the VC won. The US lost the public support so Nixon ran on 'get us out of Viet Nam'. The lefties then tarred Nixon with the failure brush.

One interesting thing is Kerry actually met with the VC peace delegation in Paris and drew up surrender terms for the US. Yeah, same guy who wants to command the troops now. What a POS.

They VC were essentially defeated during the Tet offensive and they knew it. Read Giaps book. It gives a good account.

So when you hear how screwed we are in the present war in Iraq, just remember, the leftists did it in Viet Nam first. Now it's deja vu in Iraq. You might even notice it's the same leftists players on stage spreading the lies.

[paul51]

Of course the prolong the war. When our enemies see dissension on the home front, it only encourages them to continue thinking (unfortunately, knowing) that they have a chance of breaking our will. The same thing is happening in Iraq. Our enemies see the backbiting and second guessing of our President and our war policy and it encourages them to continue the fight. Unfortunately, they are aided by the press, foreign and domestic, that spins the debate and makes appear that our will is even weaker than it may be. They all have the blood of out troops on their hands.

[Texasforever]

Just look at Iraq for your answer. The "insurgency" began when all of the negative stories about Bush "lying us into war" came into being and it has fed on that ever since.

[paul51]

Apologies for the grammar and spelling. I get excited

[oyez]

Kerry an company helped jepardize and weaken American resolve while giving hope and comfort to North Viet Nam. I credit Bob McNamara for loosing the war.

[elbucko]

However, because the anti-war demonstrations were truly getting massive in the US at that point,.....

Not exactly. The demonstrations were getting massive press coverage. The TV press had decided that Vietnam was a lost cause and began to make it so. Film footage was broadcast over and over.

As well, Lyndon Johnson did not do anybody any favors when he declined a second term. Though I hate LBJ's guts, his backing out of the '68 election sent another message to the Viet Cong that encouraged their struggle. LBJ "started" Vietnam to insure his second term, then turned coward when the going got tough (actually, I think he wanted the Democrats to "beg" him to run again).

What Kerry's testimony did was to turn duty in Vietnam into individual struggles of survival for each American soldier. The effect of Kerry's Senate testimony was; "Every man for himself". Not unlike Kerry.

[bitt]

wow, check out these videos. more very honest, very average joes that were worked over by Traitor John, and they speak so simply that you know it is from the heart.

[elbucko]

The oppression of the South rests on the head of Kerry and his fellow travelers.

It certainly does.

[Joe_October]

The "Peace" protestors got millions killed in Vietnam. They did more to harm those they claimed to be helping. Who would possibly want any of them to back them up.

They are simply sad, nasty, humans.

[Arizona Carolyn]

There is an entire chapter on this subject in the Clinton Chronicles. It explained how the behind-the-scenes work done by the anti-war protestors of the time (Clinton was one) actually caused the war to last longer and at least an additional 20,000 deaths. That chapter alone is worth the price of the book.

[MarineBrat]

You are looking for this...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1249

David Horowitz is what I believe to be as great an authority on this issue as any other person alive.

MarineBrat

[Tax Government]

Democrat administrations did not fight the Vietnam war to win, and let it stagnate. That, in turn, became the basis for valid protests of the administration's handling of the war. Goldwater had the right idea: bomb Hanoi harbor and bring the war to an early close.

Note that when a Republican, Nixon, got elected, the war ended.

So, "thanks," democRats, for your mishandling of the Vietnam war. You proved for eternity, to my satisfaction, your inability to manage the country.

[Army Air Corps]

Thank you for your service, sir. You fought in a war that we won on the battlefield only to have weak-kneed politicians p*ss-away hard won bargaining power. I reecntly visited Vietnam and many in the South still have an affinity for the US and her people. "US, number 1" was something that I heard often.

[chuckles]

There is an old documentary series called "Viet Nam, The 10,000 day War". It's been a long time since I watched it, but I'm sure somewhere in it there is an interview with a commie muckity muck that says the Viet Cong were wanting to give up with the bombing in Hanoi, but that the US was coming apart at the seams with the protesters, and they knew if they could just hang on long enough, they would win. The commie pinko flea infested doper protesters were the reason we lost, along with feckless, useless liberals running the war. Nixon tried to actually win the war by going into Laos and Cambodia and killing the enemy which brought us Kent State. The rest is history.

This is why it is of utmost importance that Bush, not Kerry win. This is bigger than taxes, the economy, abortion, sodomites, gun control, et al. This is absolutely about the very survival of America! You have to be over 50 to have a clue what it was like in the '60's and '70's. The inmates will actually, literally be running the asylum. Klintoon was a moderate conservative compared to this bunch. If the media would just get off their arse's, they could get all the pics of Jane Fonda and JFK and Weathermen, SDS, Communist Party officials, schools burning, flags burning(how can we live through a presidency with a pres that burns flags?), etc. Have we figured out if Kerry was at the "Kill the Senators" mtg? I bet the FBI knows. You know Hoover had Kerry's number. Can you get FBI info from a FOIA request?

[American in Israel]

It taught evil men that they do not win wars by force, but by perserverence in evil. Big battles make big losses, but random indiscriminate slaughter everywhere weakens resolve of good men.

Kerry led the attack that did not lengthen the war, it lost it. But Democrats have been snatching defeat from the jaws of victory for a long time.

[XBob]

Kerry and company caused us to lose the Vietnam war and is now in the process of causing us to lose the Iraq war.

Gawd - he's good at it!!

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Ramsey Clark to Join Panel for Saddam’s Defense

arabnews press release 25 August 2004

NOTE :
Ramsey Clark is pictured below with Kerry and
Vietnam phony vet Al Hubbard
Who was head of the
Vietnam Veterans Against the War movement.



NEW:
FReeper smith288 has an online version of
Kerry's "The New Soldier"
You can read it without downloading pdf files!
CLICK HERE

From Kerry's "The New Soldier":
Al Hubbard Sgt., 22 Troop Carrier Squadron Aug. ’65-June ’66

Emotions: Walking down the flight line at Saigon past stacks of aluminum cases containing American bodies and past stacks of aluminum luggage containing American currency. Seeing the tight, sad face of an Airman loading the bodies aboard a dirty Air Force Transport and the wide smiling face of a stewardess greeting the passengers aboard a clean Pan American Clipper Jet. Hearing a Vietnamese beg you to leave his country and an American colonel tells you to bomb his country. Hearing a Vietnamese invite you to live in his home, after the war and an American explain why you can’t live in his block, after the war. Flying over barren, brown, safe American held terrain and over lush, green unsafe enemy terrain. Feeling happy to be leaving a country in which you do not belong and sad to be returning to a country in which you are not allowed to belong. Sacrificing a portion of your consciousness so you won’t have to deal with being there and building mental blocks so you won’t have to deal with having been there.

- Al Hubbard, proven fraud who never set foot in Viet Nam. The only Vietnamese he ever met was when he was collaborating with the North Vietnamese in Paris
on the American Communist Party's nickel.
John Kerry's explanation: "He (Hubbard) simply exaggarated his particular position.
But nobody knew it at the time. And those things happen."

The New Soldier, (46 pages)
By John Kerry
and Vietnam Veterans
Against the War
PART I (pdf file)
PART II (pdf file)
PART III (pdf file)

Kerry hopes everyone
in the USA gets this book!

NEW:
“Without question,
we were held captive longer
because of the anti-war people,
the Kerrys, the Fondas and Haydens,
the names we knew over there -
they encouraged the enemy to hang on.”
Excerpt from “Stolen Honor” website
- Leo Thorsness
Former Vietnam POW
CLICK HERE



Send this url for the online version

http://ejsmithweb.com/fr/newsoldier/

Send this url for the Stolen Honor website

http://www.stolenhonor.com/

Print this out (46 pages) and disribute it,
especially to the liberals you know.

Copy and paste the links to everyone you know.

http://nomayo.mu.nu/archives/New%20Soldier%20Inro.pdf

http://nomayo.mu.nu/archives/New%20Soldier.pdf

http://nomayo.mu.nu/archives/New%20Soldier%20Epilogue.pdf

[Just mythoughts]

Compare and contrast what this bunch have done over the "war" in Iraq.

These leftist groups have sent signals to those who reject a "FREE" nation in Iraq that "IF" they can hang on until JFKerry becomes president they can return to Saddam.

The same method of operation used in this nation during the Vietnam war is now being replayed by this same bunch.

The numbers of people slaughtered after our leaving Vietnam via the leftist support of "communism" is upon their heads and for this they will be held to account.

Note JFKerry signal to these terrorists he will fight a "sensitive" war.

[DMZFrank]

This was posted in Feb by Freeper Tailgunner Joe. As a Vietnam armor and Infantry vet, I will NEVER forgive the anti-war left untill they own up to this.


How North Vietnam Won The War [Jane Fonda, Ramsey Clark et al.]
Wall Street Journal ^ | August 3, 1995 | Bui Tin

How North Vietnam Won The War

Taken from The Wall Street Journal, Thursday August 3, 1995

What did the North Vietnamese leadership think of the American antiwar movement? What was the purpose of the Tet Offensive? How could the U.S. have been more successful in fighting the Vietnam War? Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army, received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. He later became editor of the People's Daily, the official newspaper of Vietnam. He now lives in Paris, where he immigrated after becoming disillusioned with the fruits of Vietnamese communism.

Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?

Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said, "We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."

Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?

A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.

Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?

A: Keenly.

Q: Why?

A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.

Q: How could the Americans have won the war?

A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.

Q: Anything else?

A: Train South Vietnam's generals. The junior South Vietnamese officers were good, competent and courageous, but the commanding general officers were inept.

Q: Did Hanoi expect that the National Liberation Front would win power in South Vietnam?

A: No. Gen. [Vo Nguyen] Giap [commander of the North Vietnamese army] believed that guerrilla warfare was important but not sufficient for victory. Regular military divisions with artillery and armor would be needed. The Chinese believed in fighting only with guerrillas, but we had a different approach. The Chinese were reluctant to help us. Soviet aid made the war possible. Le Duan [secretary general of the Vietnamese Communist Party] once told Mao Tse-tung that if you help us, we are sure to win; if you don't, we will still win, but we will have to sacrifice one or two million more soldiers to do so.

Q: Was the National Liberation Front an independent political movement of South Vietnamese?

A: No. It was set up by our Communist Party to implement a decision of the Third Party Congress of September 1960. We always said there was only one party, only one army in the war to liberate the South and unify the nation. At all times there was only one party commissar in command of the South.

Q: Why was the Ho Chi Minh trail so important?

A: It was the only way to bring sufficient military power to bear on the fighting in the South. Building and maintaining the trail was a huge effort, involving tens of thousands of soldiers, drivers, repair teams, medical stations, communication units.

Q: What of American bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail?

A: Not very effective. Our operations were never compromised by attacks on the trail. At times, accurate B-52 strikes would cause real damage, but we put so much in at the top of the trail that enough men and weapons to prolong the war always came out the bottom. Bombing by smaller planes rarely hit significant targets.

Q: What of American bombing of North Vietnam?

A: If all the bombing had been concentrated at one time, it would have hurt our efforts. But the bombing was expanded in slow stages under Johnson and it didn't worry us. We had plenty of times to prepare alternative routes and facilities. We always had stockpiles of rice ready to feed the people for months if a harvest were damaged. The Soviets bought rice from Thailand for us.

Q: What was the purpose of the 1968 Tet Offensive?

A: To relieve the pressure Gen. Westmoreland was putting on us in late 1966 and 1967 and to weaken American resolve during a presidential election year.

Q: What about Gen. Westmoreland's strategy and tactics caused you concern?

A: Our senior commander in the South, Gen. Nguyen Chi Thanh, knew that we were losing base areas, control of the rural population and that his main forces were being pushed out to the borders of South Vietnam. He also worried that Westmoreland might receive permission to enter Laos and cut the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

In January 1967, after discussions with Le Duan, Thanh proposed the Tet Offensive. Thanh was the senior member of the Politburo in South Vietnam. He supervised the entire war effort. Thanh's struggle philosophy was that "America is wealthy but not resolute," and "squeeze tight to the American chest and attack." He was invited up to Hanoi for further discussions. He went on commercial flights with a false passport from Cambodia to Hong Kong and then to Hanoi. Only in July was his plan adopted by the leadership. Then Johnson had rejected Westmoreland's request for 200,000 more troops. We realized that America had made its maximum military commitment to the war. Vietnam was not sufficiently important for the United States to call up its reserves. We had stretched American power to a breaking point. When more frustration set in, all the Americans could do would be to withdraw; they had no more troops to send over.

Tet was designed to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly defended parts of South Vietnam cities during a holiday and a truce when few South Vietnamese troops would be on duty. Before the main attack, we would entice American units to advance close to the borders, away from the cities. By attacking all South Vietnam's major cities, we would spread out our forces and neutralize the impact of American firepower. Attacking on a broad front, we would lose some battles but win others. We used local forces nearby each target to frustrate discovery of our plans. Small teams, like the one which attacked the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, would be sufficient. It was a guerrilla strategy of hit-and-run raids.

Q: What about the results?

A: Our losses were staggering and a complete surprise;. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for re-election. The second and third waves in May and September were, in retrospect, mistakes. Our forces in the South were nearly wiped out by all the fighting in 1968. It took us until 1971 to re-establish our presence, but we had to use North Vietnamese troops as local guerrillas. If the American forces had not begun to withdraw under Nixon in 1969, they could have punished us severely. We suffered badly in 1969 and 1970 as it was.

Q: What of Nixon?

A: Well, when Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong [prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, "he's the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn't elect him; even if you gave him candy, he doesn't dare to intervene in Vietnam again." We tested Ford's resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52's in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South Vietnam.

Q: What else?

A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.

[stockpirate]

Is John Kerry a War Criminal and a Traitor?

Consider the following.

After the Tet Offensive of 1968, the Viet Cong were decimated, the North Vietnam Communists were beaten, but with the Socialist leaning press in America and the VVAW’s antiwar protests the North Vietnamese Communists decided to hold on. John Kerry did not join VVAW until after his return from Vietnam in early 1969, and until then VVAW didn’t have very many members (8,500) and were not very successful at getting heard. The FBI reports that VVAW was nearly inactive until the Moratoriums in the fall of 1969. See pg 90 So, the press and the antiwar movement in America prevented the North Vietnamese Communists from surrendering.

This meant that instead of a US victory in South Vietnam and freedom for the South Vietnamese we had about 10,000 more US deaths from the time John Kerry came on board with the VVAW until the end of the war. America’s POW's were being tortured while listening to tapes of John "Traitor" Kerry calling them baby killers. America’s brave soldiers were dieing in the jungles of Vietnam and John Kerry

The VVAW, an antiwar group, founded in the spring of 1967, which Kerry was one of the national leaders of, was receiving directions from the North Vietnamese Communist Government. VVAW in contact with in contact with NV Communist Government

The directions were on how the VVAW should protest the Vietnam War.

The interaction became so depraved, that the North Vietnamese Communist contacted the VVAW via a phone call and advised the VVAW that they were getting ready to start an attack on US troops and that the VVAW was to be prepared to increase the protests against the increase in bombing that the NV Communists were sure would happen. This put our men in further danger because of John Kerry and VVAW actions. VVAW gets directions from the North Vietnamese Communists

Al Hubbard, a leader of the VVAW briefed the NV, Soviets and other communist countries concerning “Electronic Battlefield Vietnam” as to tactics, methods and equipment which put US troops at extreme risk. Link to EBV

John Kerry had no concern for the lives of his fellow soldiers in Vietnam or the POW's, John Kerry only cared about himself and his ambition to become POTUS, whatever the cost.

How many deaths of United States servicemen does John Kerry have on his hands?

How many families has John Kerry's behavior as a VVAW leader and a traitor to his country caused untold pain and suffering to?

How many unnecessary tears have been cried because John Kerry betrayed our trust to help a Communist government?

Does John Kerry still have ties to Communists in America?

John Kerry was an officer in the US Navy during his protests of the Vietnam War, having not received his discharge until 1978.

Why didn't John Kerry speak out just one time against the war crimes of his "Comrades in Arms the North Vietnamese Communists"?

Steven J. Pitkin says about his Winter Soldier testimony. “John Kerry and other leaders of that event pressured me to testify about American war crimes, despite my repeated statements that I could not honestly do so. One event leader strongly implied that I would not be provided transportation back to my home in Baltimore, Maryland, if I failed to comply. Kerry and other leaders of the event instructed me to publicly state that I had witnessed incidents of rape, brutality, atrocities and racism, knowing that such statements would necessarily be untrue.”

I've also been wondering why Kerry never reported the atrocities he supposedly witnessed while in Vietnam. Maybe because Kerry may have never witnessed any atrocities while he was in Vietnam. The VVAW leaders were meeting with the North Vietnamese Communist Government, leaders of the Communist Party in Moscow, and possibly the KGB, leaders of the Communist Party International in Paris, leaders of the Communist Party USA, and last but not least the group of Communists in South Vietnam that backed the North Vietnamese Communists.

These Communist groups were directing the VVAW leaders as to what they wanted them to do, when they wanted them to do it, and that is what the VVAW did.

So in a nutshell, when the world communist leaders told Kerry and his VVAW group what to do, that is what they did, no questions asked. I for one do not believe he has changed!