Posted on 05/03/2006 11:35:44 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
"If we got out," asked Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press" recently, "and there was a civil war, chaos, and you saw al Qaeda moving in -- in record numbers -- would you go back in?"
Russert's guest, Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., replied, "Well, first of all, I heard the same kinds of suggestions at the time of the end of the Vietnam War. The 'Great Bloodbath,' we're going to have over 100,000 people that were going to be murdered and killed at that time. And for those of us who were strongly opposed to the war, [we] heard those same kinds of arguments."
The normally persistent Russert never challenged Kennedy's incredible assertion. Yet the bloodbath some predicted would occur -- if we withdrew from Vietnam -- did happen.
America lost the Vietnam War, not on the battlefield, but on the home front of public support. Anti-war activists and the liberal media helped turn public opinion sharply against the war. Although our soldiers won every major battle in the field, public opinion turned against a war increasingly perceived as "unwinnable." Our withdrawal, however, gave the Vietnamese armies under Ho Chi Minh free rein to overrun South Vietnam -- raping, pillaging, plundering, impoverishing, imprisoning, torturing and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of people.
The withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam also strengthened the hand of the communist Khmer Rouge in neighboring Cambodia. Their leader, Pol Pot, embarked on a bloody ethnic cleansing campaign. While the exact number of Cambodians slaughtered can never be fully known, most estimate those killed from a low of 1 million to a high of 3 million.
A million or so "boat people" fled Vietnam in flimsy watercraft on the South China Sea. Thousands of Vietnamese died in "re-education camps."
I received the following e-mail from a listener who watched the Kennedy/Russert interview: "Has the Senator ever heard of the movie, 'The Killing Fields'??? During the late 70s and early 80s my ex-husband used to teach political science at a local community college. Every year we would host a Christmas party for his students, many of whom were refugees from Vietnam and Cambodia. I spent a lot of time visiting with these kids and their stories were heartbreaking. I remember one young man in particular. His father had been sent to a 'reeducation camp' after the US withdrew. The last time he saw his father, he told the young man to get out of the country anyway possible. He became one of the boat people and somehow made it to the United States. He was obviously happy to be here, but the sadness in his eyes when he spoke of his father was truly haunting. He had no idea if his father was dead or alive. Maybe someone needs to give the Senator a refresher course on the history of Southeast Asia!"
In July 1986, The Wall Street Journal wrote, "South Vietnam was eventually conquered by the North, and Cambodia was taken over by the communist Khmer Rouge, who in trying to recreate a primitive communist agricultural society slaughtered from 1 million to 3 million Cambodians. If we take 2 million as the best estimate, then in four years the government of this small nation of 7 million alone killed 64 percent more people than died in the 10-year Vietnam War. Overall, the best estimate of those killed by the victorious communists in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia is 2,270,000. . . . "
Kennedy's blase re-write of Indochina's bloody history following our military pullout there is not unlike Sen. John Kerry's, D-Mass., 1971 slam against the soldiers in Vietnam. When testifying before a Senate committee, Kerry said, " . . . [W]e had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, 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 the stories 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 a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam . . . "
Kennedy's revisionist history and Kerry's attack on the honor of those who served in Vietnam demonstrate why many Americans refuse to trust Democrats with national security. They called Reagan a war-monger, criticized the military buildup that hastened the demise of the Soviet Union, insisted that SDI wouldn't and couldn't work, and now call Bush a war criminal.
Our effort in Iraq requires commitment and steadfastness. As with Vietnam, the American-led coalition cannot lose in the battlefield. Despite the insurgency, the Iraqi people went to the polls and voted, and now attempt to assemble a government. Bush's detractors compare the Iraq War "quagmire" to Vietnam. If they truly believe that, why aren't they worried about . . . "what next"?
Teddy is such a [:o)]
How does the left get so good at rewriting history? Honestly...
I know some Vietnamese Boat People who would likely enjoy a private conversation with Kennedy. Particularly if they could take a baseball bat to it.
Most S.E. Asians that I talk to (when they want to talk about Vietnam expansion) are grateful to the U.S. for at least slowing them down. The U.S.'s effort there is looked upon favorably.
Ted Kennedy is part of the Culture of Treason of the American left.
Russert is looking pretty bloated these days, too. I wonder if "Big Russ" cringes when his son lets this crap get by?
You are almost being too kind. There is no redeeming feature about him.
Liberals lie to achieve their goals. Why am I not surprised?
History has a way of trying to repeat itself.....
unless backbone is shown by the republican 'majority'.
...."America lost the Vietnam War, not on the battlefield, but on the home front of public support. Anti-war activists and the liberal media helped turn public opinion sharply against the war. Although our soldiers won every major battle in the field, public opinion turned against a war increasingly perceived as "unwinnable." ........
Liberals always know what the future is, it's the past they have to keep changing.
I hope many of us drop a line to Tim and ask, 'how/why it is', that he did not go there; thereby allowing this incredible (though typical) lying Demrat re-write of our history, to stand. . .
Well, sir, we are still living with the bad effects of pulling out of Vietnam. In the last few years, every available mobile home here has been snatched up by illegals from SE Asia. They have turned my community into a Cambodian refugee camp. They don't speak English and work in the underground economy at a Thai restaurant. Thanks a lot. You done good!
I have not read Teddy's book and suspect it won't hit my reading list anytime soon. What I would like to know of Ted though is, why when told by the CIA that the Cubans were waiting on the beach at the Bay of Pigs for the invasion over a week ahead of time they went ahead anyway and then didn't support the invasion?
True liberal backbone!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.