In English, please? You keep talking about this "vote". What "vote"? Would this be before or after the north's death squads entering villages and murdering in the night, terrorizing the countryside?
The only legitimate vote occurred several years prior, when the agreement was made to form three states and those who wanted no part of Minh's north voted with their feet and left. This other mythological "vote" you keep talking about (even if it had occurred) would have been illegitimate due to the simple fact that this was a terrorized people. Terrorized by the communists. A "vote" under such circumstances is meaningless. Even if it had occurred (which it didn't). Why do you keep bringing it up?
I know of no contemporary analysts who thought the Viets would vote for someone other than Ho to rule a united country.
What united country? There were three states (later two), and the South was composed of people who had already made it clear that they didn't want to live under Minh. What more is there to say?
You're conclusion that the Viets would be coerced does not give credence to the mind set that the there was a strong anti-colonial feeling throughout the country, except by some in Saigon.
I do not discount that anti-colonial feelings and nationalistic sentiment were strong and could easily and understandably induce an average Vietnamese person to think "I don't like Minh much, but better than more foreign devils". What you keep leaving out is that the sentiment "I don't want to be slaughtered by communists for voting the wrong way" was also present. So the notion of "taking a vote" is illegitimate either way, and I honestly don't know why you keep bringing it up.
For the last time, there WAS NO "vote", and if there had been, it would have been completely illegitimate due to the terrorism of the communists. A "vote" under terroristic conditions is not legitimate and shouldn't even be taken seriously by any thinking person. Therefore, the only indication we have of what those people "wanted" (other than, of course, just to be left alone to live lives and tend crops - without either commie fanatics or foreign devils using them as pinballs) is the fact that when the original partition was made, and they had the choice whether to live under Minh, THEY CHOSE NOT TO. Well, what do you have to say about that FACT? Anything?
We did take over the south Viet Nam government. We killed the guy that was in there
Not "we", but you are probably right that the assassination had tacit agreement from Kennedy. I disagree with this. I think it was the wrong way to go. I disagree with lots of dumb-ass stuff that pampered and corrupt idiots like Kennedy and Johnson did. (Like fighting a half-assed war, for example.)
Laos and Cambodia were small dominos compared to the theory and rhetoric at the time.
Just think how much bigger the dominos would've been had we not gone there at all.
In fact the long view is that the domino theory was not upheld
By "the long view", you mean "your view", right? Just so we're clear.
because events around the world and in Asia prevent further Soviet expansion, especially in such a linear fashion.
I agree with this. One of those events was the Vietnam War.