Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mykdsmom

About 5-6 years ago, I guess I was sophmore in college, I had a history class at Monmouth University in NJ with a left wing professor (although I didn't realize it at the time).

I remember very clearly the day he told the class how he and his wife were invited to a dinner party at the house of a friend of his wife's. They went in and were sitting down and the conversation turned to the husband of the host. The husband mentioned that he flew B-52s (or whatever the big bombers were called) in Vietnam. My professor then told us that he stood up and cursed the guy and dragged his wife out of the party.

From how he told the story i gathered that this event took place long after the Vietnam war was over.

After he finished telling it I remember how animated and angery he was. This made an impression on me as it is one of the only things I remember about his class! None of us knew what to say, we were just young stupid kids and didn't really have a clue what he was talking about.

In any case, if the hatered and rage that this professor showed NOW was any indication of the attitude back in the 70s then I certainly believe the other testimony posted here.

Just recently, after doing some research myself, I found the actual history of the Vietnam war to be quite different then what I was taught in both high school and college. It was written in terms of Kerry's positions before the election so apologies to those sick of seeing his name:




http://www.neoperspectives.com/johnkerry.htm

Becoming their spokesmen, he famously testified on national television before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, headed by Liberal Democratic Senator William Fullbright.

At this time, American prisoners of war were being held in atrocious conditions by the North Vietnamese. Subject to daily torture, starvation, and disease, they were forced to sign confessions of war crimes and were subjected to continuing propoganda by the North Vietnamese. Senator John McCain, who spent 6 years in captivity, wrote in the May 14, 1973 issue of U.S. News & World Report:

"All through this period," wrote McCain, his captors were "bombarding us with anti-war quotes from people in high places back in Washington. This was the most effective propaganda they had to use against us."

"They used Senator Fullbright a great deal." (1)

Testifying before the committee Kerry said:

I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country. (2)

War is hell and in any prolonged engagement in the midst of a civilian population there are going to be some atrocities and civilian casualties, and there are documented instances of American atrocities (My Lai), but certainly nothing was occurring that remotely resembled what Kerry reported to the nation. In the United States military, if a soldier witnesses a war crime, he is required to report it to his commanding officer. If Kerry witnessed (or committed) war crimes he never reported them to his superiors. Thirty years later in Iraq, Kerry and his surrogates have similarly played up the relatively isolated misconducts by American soldiers in the Abu Graib prison. In fact, Kerry called for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld resignation over the scandal.

In reality, American forces generously built schools, hospitals and roads to try to win the 'hearts and minds' of the South Vietnamese people and attempted to minimize civilian casualties. North Vietnamese P.O.Ws were generally treated humanly. Kerry's comments were widely played throughout the media. Public opinion, already turning against the war, began to shift even faster. Moral plummeted on the front lines. Returning soldiers were asked by friends and family if they had committed war crimes, veterans seen in uniform were sometimes booed. This deep resentment and feeling of betrayal is why only 4 out of 20 swift veteran captains who served with Kerry support his candidacy. Hundreds of swift boat veterans, including all of Kerry's surviving superior officers formed a '527' organization, 'Swift Boat Veterans For Truth' to run ads against Kerry during his run for the presidency.

Subsequent military and FBI investigations found that a number of the 150 VVAW veterans whose testimony Kerry cited, including the co-founder, were not even veterans and many had never even seen combat. The investigations also discovered that almost all of their testimony was either blatantly falsified, or uncorroborated. Kerry has never apologized for his actions, but has said he regretted his word choice.

In 1970 Kerry traveled to Paris to visit secretly with two Communist North Vietnamese peace delegations. This action may have been illegal according to US code 18 U.S.C. 953, which states that a U.S. citizen cannot go abroad and negotiate with a foreign power. The penalty for violation is a maximum of three years imprisonment. (28) Kerry has never been charged.

A few years after Kerry's Paris trip, the United States and the North Vietnamese Communist government signed a peace agreement and the United States withdrew from South Vietnam. The Communists immediately violated their agreement, attacked South Vietnam, and entered Saigon on April 30, 1975.

When asked about possible repercussions against the South Vietnamese Kerry answered:

"Having done what we have done to that country, we have an obligation to offer sanctuary to the perhaps 2,000, 3,000 people who might face political assassination or something else."

That same week, he appeared on the Dick Cavett show. "There'd be no interest on the part of the Vietnamese to start massacring people after the U.S. has pulled out," Kerry told Cavett. (5)

Prior to 1975 the North Vietnamese Communists had already killed between 50,000-100,000 of their own citizens in purges, terrors and 'land reforms'. (3) Upon reuniting their country, the North Vietnamese killed or sent to labor camps hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese citizens. Millions of refugees have since fled Vietnam. Known as 'the boat people', they sought refuge wherever they could. At least 100,000 people drowned fleeing the Communists. Others were attacked by pirates, or were repatriated to the hellish labor camps of Vietnam. Today, over 1.2 million South Vietnamese refugees live in the United States. Yet Kerry seemed to believe the primary threat to the Vietnamese people was that posed by the armed forces of the United States.

In December 1975, just months after Saigon fell, the government of neighboring Laos fell to a Vietnamese backed Communist force. Hundreds of thousands were killed in war, famine and political assassination (3). The Hmong tribespeople, loyal American allies before the pullout, were decimated, an estimated ten per cent of them were killed by Communist forces. (6)

On April 17th, 1975 the Khmer Rouge, a Communist guerrilla group led by Pol Pot, overthrew the US backed government (weakened by the US withdrawal) with the help of the North Vietnamese government and China. They forced all city dwellers into the countryside and to labor camps. During their rule, it is estimated that 2 million Cambodians died by starvation, torture or execution. 2 million Cambodians represented approximately 30% of the Cambodian population during that time. (7)

In sum, the American withdrawal left over 3 million dead and caused millions more to flee their homes. Today South East Asia is still impoverished and undemocratic. Growing up, we are taught that the 'domino effect' was a foolish, flawed theory. In reality, it was a perfect predictor of what came to pass. South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia fell to the Communists within a year. Burma battled Communists insurgencies, even while embarking on an even harsher form of socialism that starved it's population. Communist insurgencies, although not ultimately successful, increased in intensity in Thailand. It's possible that Communism could have spread even further and the insurgencies been more successful if the newly formed Communist nations hadn't turned on each other in another orgy of violence.

As these events unfolded, America suffered a terrible weakening of our national pride and our moral leadership in the world was shaken. We were not defeated on the battlefield, we were defeated by weak national leadership and by public opinion here at home. Kerry has never apologized for his actions or testimony, although he admitted he 'used a poor choice of words'.


154 posted on 11/10/2004 5:42:36 PM PST by traviskicks (Poverty has no causes. Only prosperity has causes. - Jane Jacobs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: traviskicks
Your extended commentary is very much to the point. There is another aspect of the depressing domestic history of the Viet Nam conflict that gets little examination. That is why the national leadership class fell apart over the conflict. When faced near simultaneously with the Tet Offense and in Korea the Blue House raid and the seizure of the USS Pueblo the top echelon of the civilian leadership collapsed into confusion that bordered on panic. The appropriate responses would have invoked the wrath of the left but so what. Why did the 'leaders of the Free World' show such spinelessness in face of an at best medium level threat situation? Watching this meltdown from the sidelines as I completed college and prepared to enter the military gave me a deep seated queasy feeling.

Beyond this issue is the bigger issue of how and why the academic and intellectual establishment became subverted by what were for all intents crypto-communists. I first noticed this with the near religious adulation Fidel Castro and his thugs were given by many liberal academics and intellectuals. Sidney Hook or some other veteran of the twilight struggle against the commies noted that a movement and a leader that makes the gun its symbol after taking power is wed to the cult of revolutionary violence and will only become more tyrannical as time passes. This thought was completely dismissed by Castro's large US cheering section. His appeal amazed me and (back then I was pretty much a New Deal-Fair Deal-New Frontier liberal) it was bothersome that so many major academic and intellectual figures didn't take one look at the man and see that he was a sort of red Hitler figure.

The emergence of the progressively more radical faction of the liberal left and its effective mau-mauing of academia, the intellectual establishment and eventually the Democratic Party is the elephant in the living room of liberal America that they don't and won't recognize. The incredible rage and hatred displayed by left liberals during the latest presidential campaign are all to familiar and disturbing to those who lived through the awful period from 1963 to 1975 and then watched the buzzards come home to roost during the Carter administration.
547 posted on 11/12/2004 8:44:55 AM PST by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson