6 ms·

My parents are Vietnamese. My dad actually fought in the war with the South Vietnamese army alongside US troops. He's a lifelong Republican, as were all of his

My parents are Vietnamese. My dad actually fought in the war with the South Vietnamese army alongside US troops. He's a lifelong Republican, as were all of his brothers who also fought, as well as the vast majority of his friends and their families who arrived as refugees. They supported the war. They saw the US as liberators against the communists who wanted to murder them and take over their country. They love America and despise communist Vietnam. They wish the US had finished the job. Promoting things like the link above and conveniently omitting the pure savagery of the Viet Cong, Ho Chi Minh, and the communists from the North is pure propaganda. It's always puzzling to me what types of topics journalists choose to run. Instead of listening to journalists reporting on Vietnam from half a world away, you should visit Little Saigon in Southern California and Northern California and ask them how they feel about America and the Vietnam War. EDIT: Since I have a post limit and I can't reply below, I'll reply here. quan: I didn't say My Lai was propaganda. I said emphasizing My Lai over the several atrocities committed by the communists, including the systematic murders of those who opposed communism, is propaganda.

namelost 9y ago
I'm sorry but the actions of the Viet Cong do not excuse the crimes committed the US, and neither does the nationality of your parents. To this day, many are maimed and killed by US land mines in the region, and the US does not give a shit.
- Erlangolem 9y ago
  Just one point: there is no, “The US” as I’ve learned over time. The US is geographically vast, and full of hundreds of millions of people from wildly different backgrounds. Those poeple have politics ranging from Ghengis Khan, to Ghandi. They seem to agree, as a nation, on very little.
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    That is true for every country so it doesn't add anything to the discussion.
    - Erlangolem 9y ago
      Have you ever been to Iceland? Sweden is remarkably united in their politics as well. Japan is much less politically and culturally diverse than most US states. Few countries are as geographically large and populous as the US either, even before you work in hundreds of years of immigration. I don’t appreciate your shallow dismissal.
      - maxxxxx 9y ago
        I have lived in Germany and the US each for years and for months in several other countries. From the outside or on a short visit all countries look homogeneous. Only after a while you see the subtleties. From that perspective I don't think the US is any different from other countries. Maybe other countries are in agreement on things that are contentious in the US but then they have other issues that never get discussed in the US. In short, the US is nothing special. It's a country like every other country and should be treated as such.
        Erlangolem 9y ago
        I disagree, but I can’t see the value in pitting anecdote against anecdote. If you want to believe that the US’ history, geography, and demographics make it essentially the same as (to use my examples) Iceland, Japan, and Sweden, I doubt that I could change your mind.
        maxxxxx 9y ago
        Look at where this discussion started. It started from someone talking about the Viet Cong and the US. Then you said there is no such thing as the US because it's so big and diverse. In this context the US has to be seen as one unit or how else can you describe a war? As far as Sweden goes I bet the people living north of the Arctic circle have little in common with people living in Stockholm.
        Erlangolem 9y ago
- JoeAltmaier 9y ago
  "The US" no longer uses anti-personnel mines outside the Korean DMZ (which is actually managed by the South Koreans). The US does not deploy them anywhere, and hasn't for years. Maybe its India and Pakistan we're thinking of, hm?
  - rangibaby 9y ago
    The ones that were deployed during the Vietnam war are still there and hurting people
  - Voloskaya 9y ago
    Did you really think she/he was suggesting that the US is setting up landmines in Vietnam 50 years after the war? Landmines can kill people a very long time after being deployed you know... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/18/vietnam-unexploded-landmines-bombs https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/18/vietnam-unexpl...
    - JoeAltmaier 9y ago
      So you really think people 50 years ago are 'the US'? That was my point. Thus the highlight.
      - simonh 9y ago
        Do you really think the US government bears no responsibility for the actions of the US government 50 years ago and the consequences today? Would you extend that to other governments too? In what circumstances would you not? What Cut off period do you think is right generally? For example do you think the US has no responsibility towards Pacific Islanders whose islands are now lethally radioactive due to nuclear tests 50 years ago, and can reasonably wash its hands of any problems arising from that today?
  - kss238 9y ago
    The comment was about mines left behind from the Vietnam war, not present day.
- vietnamese59 9y ago
  You're setting up a straw man to an argument I never made. All I'm telling you is how my dad, his brothers, and the vast majority of his first generation Vietnamese friends (who arrived as refugees) feel about America and the Vietnam War. Despite what you may think, they wholeheartedly support America. If you don't believe me, you should try visiting Little Saigon on Bolsa Avenue in Orange Country and ask them what they think of the USA. Look at the flags they use (South Vietnam and the USA). If you want to get assaulted (I highly don't recommend this), try bringing Vietnam's current flag and parade it around. EDIT: to andrepd: Again, you keep setting up straw man arguments. It's very easy to attack someone if you misrepresent their views. I never said anything about excusing massacres.
  - andrepd 9y ago
    Well thank you for that comprehensive study. I guess we shouldn't worry about the massacre anymore -.-
  - sho 9y ago
    > try visiting Little Saigon on Bolsa Avenue in Orange Country > If you want to get assaulted [..] try bringing Vietnam's current flag and parade it around What a bizarre argument. Of course you're going to find pro-USA sentiment in the very people who decided to move to the USA. I hope you realise that the opinions of a few immigrants in the states are going to be pretty unrepresentative of those who actually live in, you know, Vietnam. Speak to actual vietnamese people from actual vietnam and I don't think you'll find they are overwhelmingly pro-USA, nor at all interested in the flag of south vietnam. I'm no expert, but my experience is that they're mildly positive in attitude, mostly due to pop culture. The war was a long time ago and most people are just getting on with their lives. Many immigrant communities foster a kind of "nostalgic nationalism" as a coping strategy when adapting to a profoundly different environment. It dates pretty rapidly. I very much doubt many of the 90+ million people in Vietnam even know of "Little Saigon", nor care overmuch about the opinions of a bunch of old-timers sitting in a mall in California.
    - refurb 9y ago
      Actually, Vietnam is one of the most pro-American countries in the world. There was a survey a while and over 90% view the US favorably. You can find it with a google search.
subpixel 9y ago
Ken Burn's recent series on Vietnam is very well made and speaks with participants and stakeholders from across the ideological spectrum. Highly recommended: https://www.netflix.com/title/70202579 https://www.netflix.com/title/70202579
- vietnamese59 9y ago
  I know it's a popular series, and I haven't gotten my dad's response to it because he hasn't watched it, but many war veterans and South Vietnamese military members say it's not a very balanced documentary. https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/29/veterans-angry-disappointed-following-pbs-vietnam-war-documentary/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/29/veterans-angry-disapp... https://www.military.com/off-duty/television/2017/10/02/veterans-angry-disappointed-pbs-vietnam-war-documentary.html https://www.military.com/off-duty/television/2017/10/02/vete...
  - lostlogin 9y ago
    It’s almost like the veterans have a difficult time being objective. I’ll wait for your dad’s review before getting too critical though.
    - refurb 9y ago
      Are you sure? I've watched a bit of it and it seems to approach the war with 20/20 hindsight. "Oh of course it was wrong to be there". It ignores some of the mindset that got us there in the first place.
      - lostlogin 9y ago
        It would be interesting to compare the views of those conscripted versus those that voluntarily signed up.
  - NotSammyHagar 9y ago
    You have a lot of informed opinions because of course you were close to the war and your family was. I hope to see you continue to share your ideas, even if you are suffering some criticism.
system16 9y ago
To be fair, the Vietnamese communities in Southern California are stuck in a time bubble. Vietnam has changed dramatically since the Vietnam War (or War of American Aggression as it's called in Vietnam), but the Vietnamese diaspora's image of the country has not. It's not the same place, and the government - while nowhere near perfect - is not the same as it was 50 years ago. The country still has many problems, but it is getting better, and the country's youth have a very healthy skepticism of government (unlike mainland China). Also, let's not try to paint the former South leadership as noble. Buddhists weren't self-immolating in the streets of Saigon because of the communists, and the victim in the infamous photo being shot at point blank in the head was a Viet Cong.
- vietnamese59 9y ago
  You're using two data points when hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese civilians were systematically slaughtered by Ho Chi Minh and his comrades. The propaganda is strong when the general public knows more about the head shot photo than the mass murders committed by communist Vietnamese regime.
  - lostlogin 9y ago
    To the victims the political colour of one murderous child rapist probably doesn’t matter that much. A more neutral viewpoint could see the whole war as a series of gross violations and crimes.
andrepd 9y ago
Maybe we should ask what Soviets think of their regime (most of them supported it, and still more people prefer the Soviet Union to Putin right now). That doesn't make their regime any more or less good. And how does the "other side" committing atrocities excuse your own atrocities?? That's an appalling way to attempt to self justify.
- vietnamese59 9y ago
  Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese who opposed communism had their lives slaughtered. What is even remotely equivalent committed by the "other side"? EDIT to andrepd, since I can't reply to you because of post limit: You're using straw man arguments and I can't keep up. I don't know anything about East Timor but by "other side", I meant the US and South Vietnam. We're obviously discussing the Vietnam War and the participants involved and you're going off on a tangent that makes it impossible to have any debate with you.
  - andrepd 9y ago
    Are you serious right now? Do you want me to pick an example, any example? How about this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Timor_genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Timor_genocide US financed, supported, armed and gave the okay for the decimation of over 1/4 of the population of East Timor. Their crime? They were looking dangerously close to electing a left-wing government... Oh, and some mining companies may have lobbied Congress to stay on Indonesia's good side, since they had mining interests there (but this, I admit, is more speculative). How about Guatemala? How about Iran for Christ's sake? How many thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of people's blood is on the hands of US imperialism?
quan 9y ago
Same as your dad, five of my uncles fought in the war on the U.S. side, my grandfather and granduncle served in the South Vietnamese government in high positions. My family was persecuted after the war, many fled, the ones that stayed spent time in prison and fled after. In college, I read a lot on the Vietnam war and learned about the Tet Offensive with the Hue massacre by the Vietcong, the Land Reform prior to that. But I don't see how the photos at My Lai is "pure propaganda." If you spend some time to learn about the tragic event you will find that there were a big cover up and for over 500 human lives lost, only one man was charged and subsequently pardoned. The U.S. committed to a war when it didn't understand the people or history of Vietnam. Vietnam has a long history of fighting foreign invaders, and most people perceive the U.S. as such as they are just replacing the French when they withdrew after Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Till this day, most Vietnamese people consider China to be their biggest enemy even though the two countries share the same political ideology.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
simonh 9y ago
I’m sorry, but this is blatant whataboutism. The crimes of the Vietnamese Communists are inexcusable, but so was My Lai. The linked article was simply an American media article about something the American military did. We should be able to discuss it purely in those terms. What another army did somewhere else to other people simply isn’t pertinent in that context, even if in the same war, unless it directly relates to the circumstances at My Lai and the reasons for it happening. You aren’t saying VC atrocities excuse My Lai, or that they caused My a Lai, so how are they relevant? What context do they add to the decisions made by those American soldiers or the army cover up or subsequent investigation? I just don’t see how it would have helped the article other than to muddy and obscure the issues of discipline and accountability in the US military the massacre raises and which the article discusses. The responsibility of the VC for their actions just isn’t a necessary part of that dialogue and is an important and necessary subject, but for another time and place. At time and place in which massacres carried out elsewhere by Americans also simply wouldn’t be relevant, nor excuse anything done by the VC. And no I’m not making any false equivalency. That’s the point.

namelost 9y ago

I'm sorry but the actions of the Viet Cong do not excuse the crimes committed the US, and neither does the nationality of your parents. To this day, many are maimed and killed by US land mines in the region, and the US does not give a shit.

Erlangolem 9y ago
Just one point: there is no, “The US” as I’ve learned over time. The US is geographically vast, and full of hundreds of millions of people from wildly different backgrounds. Those poeple have politics ranging from Ghengis Khan, to Ghandi. They seem to agree, as a nation, on very little.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  That is true for every country so it doesn't add anything to the discussion.
  - Erlangolem 9y ago
    Have you ever been to Iceland? Sweden is remarkably united in their politics as well. Japan is much less politically and culturally diverse than most US states. Few countries are as geographically large and populous as the US either, even before you work in hundreds of years of immigration. I don’t appreciate your shallow dismissal.
    - maxxxxx 9y ago
      I have lived in Germany and the US each for years and for months in several other countries. From the outside or on a short visit all countries look homogeneous. Only after a while you see the subtleties. From that perspective I don't think the US is any different from other countries. Maybe other countries are in agreement on things that are contentious in the US but then they have other issues that never get discussed in the US. In short, the US is nothing special. It's a country like every other country and should be treated as such.
      - Erlangolem 9y ago
        I disagree, but I can’t see the value in pitting anecdote against anecdote. If you want to believe that the US’ history, geography, and demographics make it essentially the same as (to use my examples) Iceland, Japan, and Sweden, I doubt that I could change your mind.
        maxxxxx 9y ago
        Look at where this discussion started. It started from someone talking about the Viet Cong and the US. Then you said there is no such thing as the US because it's so big and diverse. In this context the US has to be seen as one unit or how else can you describe a war? As far as Sweden goes I bet the people living north of the Arctic circle have little in common with people living in Stockholm.
        Erlangolem 9y ago
JoeAltmaier 9y ago
"The US" no longer uses anti-personnel mines outside the Korean DMZ (which is actually managed by the South Koreans). The US does not deploy them anywhere, and hasn't for years. Maybe its India and Pakistan we're thinking of, hm?
- rangibaby 9y ago
  The ones that were deployed during the Vietnam war are still there and hurting people
- Voloskaya 9y ago
  Did you really think she/he was suggesting that the US is setting up landmines in Vietnam 50 years after the war? Landmines can kill people a very long time after being deployed you know... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/18/vietnam-unexploded-landmines-bombs https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/18/vietnam-unexpl...
  - JoeAltmaier 9y ago
    So you really think people 50 years ago are 'the US'? That was my point. Thus the highlight.
    - simonh 9y ago
      Do you really think the US government bears no responsibility for the actions of the US government 50 years ago and the consequences today? Would you extend that to other governments too? In what circumstances would you not? What Cut off period do you think is right generally? For example do you think the US has no responsibility towards Pacific Islanders whose islands are now lethally radioactive due to nuclear tests 50 years ago, and can reasonably wash its hands of any problems arising from that today?
- kss238 9y ago
  The comment was about mines left behind from the Vietnam war, not present day.
vietnamese59 9y ago
You're setting up a straw man to an argument I never made. All I'm telling you is how my dad, his brothers, and the vast majority of his first generation Vietnamese friends (who arrived as refugees) feel about America and the Vietnam War. Despite what you may think, they wholeheartedly support America. If you don't believe me, you should try visiting Little Saigon on Bolsa Avenue in Orange Country and ask them what they think of the USA. Look at the flags they use (South Vietnam and the USA). If you want to get assaulted (I highly don't recommend this), try bringing Vietnam's current flag and parade it around. EDIT: to andrepd: Again, you keep setting up straw man arguments. It's very easy to attack someone if you misrepresent their views. I never said anything about excusing massacres.
- andrepd 9y ago
  Well thank you for that comprehensive study. I guess we shouldn't worry about the massacre anymore -.-
- sho 9y ago
  > try visiting Little Saigon on Bolsa Avenue in Orange Country > If you want to get assaulted [..] try bringing Vietnam's current flag and parade it around What a bizarre argument. Of course you're going to find pro-USA sentiment in the very people who decided to move to the USA. I hope you realise that the opinions of a few immigrants in the states are going to be pretty unrepresentative of those who actually live in, you know, Vietnam. Speak to actual vietnamese people from actual vietnam and I don't think you'll find they are overwhelmingly pro-USA, nor at all interested in the flag of south vietnam. I'm no expert, but my experience is that they're mildly positive in attitude, mostly due to pop culture. The war was a long time ago and most people are just getting on with their lives. Many immigrant communities foster a kind of "nostalgic nationalism" as a coping strategy when adapting to a profoundly different environment. It dates pretty rapidly. I very much doubt many of the 90+ million people in Vietnam even know of "Little Saigon", nor care overmuch about the opinions of a bunch of old-timers sitting in a mall in California.
  - refurb 9y ago
    Actually, Vietnam is one of the most pro-American countries in the world. There was a survey a while and over 90% view the US favorably. You can find it with a google search.

subpixel 9y ago

Ken Burn's recent series on Vietnam is very well made and speaks with participants and stakeholders from across the ideological spectrum. Highly recommended: https://www.netflix.com/title/70202579 https://www.netflix.com/title/70202579

vietnamese59 9y ago
I know it's a popular series, and I haven't gotten my dad's response to it because he hasn't watched it, but many war veterans and South Vietnamese military members say it's not a very balanced documentary. https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/29/veterans-angry-disappointed-following-pbs-vietnam-war-documentary/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/29/veterans-angry-disapp... https://www.military.com/off-duty/television/2017/10/02/veterans-angry-disappointed-pbs-vietnam-war-documentary.html https://www.military.com/off-duty/television/2017/10/02/vete...
- lostlogin 9y ago
  It’s almost like the veterans have a difficult time being objective. I’ll wait for your dad’s review before getting too critical though.
  - refurb 9y ago
    Are you sure? I've watched a bit of it and it seems to approach the war with 20/20 hindsight. "Oh of course it was wrong to be there". It ignores some of the mindset that got us there in the first place.
    - lostlogin 9y ago
      It would be interesting to compare the views of those conscripted versus those that voluntarily signed up.
- NotSammyHagar 9y ago
  You have a lot of informed opinions because of course you were close to the war and your family was. I hope to see you continue to share your ideas, even if you are suffering some criticism.

system16 9y ago

To be fair, the Vietnamese communities in Southern California are stuck in a time bubble. Vietnam has changed dramatically since the Vietnam War (or War of American Aggression as it's called in Vietnam), but the Vietnamese diaspora's image of the country has not. It's not the same place, and the government - while nowhere near perfect - is not the same as it was 50 years ago. The country still has many problems, but it is getting better, and the country's youth have a very healthy skepticism of government (unlike mainland China). Also, let's not try to paint the former South leadership as noble. Buddhists weren't self-immolating in the streets of Saigon because of the communists, and the victim in the infamous photo being shot at point blank in the head was a Viet Cong.

vietnamese59 9y ago
You're using two data points when hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese civilians were systematically slaughtered by Ho Chi Minh and his comrades. The propaganda is strong when the general public knows more about the head shot photo than the mass murders committed by communist Vietnamese regime.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  To the victims the political colour of one murderous child rapist probably doesn’t matter that much. A more neutral viewpoint could see the whole war as a series of gross violations and crimes.

andrepd 9y ago

Maybe we should ask what Soviets think of their regime (most of them supported it, and still more people prefer the Soviet Union to Putin right now). That doesn't make their regime any more or less good. And how does the "other side" committing atrocities excuse your own atrocities?? That's an appalling way to attempt to self justify.

vietnamese59 9y ago
Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese who opposed communism had their lives slaughtered. What is even remotely equivalent committed by the "other side"? EDIT to andrepd, since I can't reply to you because of post limit: You're using straw man arguments and I can't keep up. I don't know anything about East Timor but by "other side", I meant the US and South Vietnam. We're obviously discussing the Vietnam War and the participants involved and you're going off on a tangent that makes it impossible to have any debate with you.
- andrepd 9y ago
  Are you serious right now? Do you want me to pick an example, any example? How about this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Timor_genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Timor_genocide US financed, supported, armed and gave the okay for the decimation of over 1/4 of the population of East Timor. Their crime? They were looking dangerously close to electing a left-wing government... Oh, and some mining companies may have lobbied Congress to stay on Indonesia's good side, since they had mining interests there (but this, I admit, is more speculative). How about Guatemala? How about Iran for Christ's sake? How many thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of people's blood is on the hands of US imperialism?

quan 9y ago

Same as your dad, five of my uncles fought in the war on the U.S. side, my grandfather and granduncle served in the South Vietnamese government in high positions. My family was persecuted after the war, many fled, the ones that stayed spent time in prison and fled after. In college, I read a lot on the Vietnam war and learned about the Tet Offensive with the Hue massacre by the Vietcong, the Land Reform prior to that. But I don't see how the photos at My Lai is "pure propaganda." If you spend some time to learn about the tragic event you will find that there were a big cover up and for over 500 human lives lost, only one man was charged and subsequently pardoned. The U.S. committed to a war when it didn't understand the people or history of Vietnam. Vietnam has a long history of fighting foreign invaders, and most people perceive the U.S. as such as they are just replacing the French when they withdrew after Dien Bien Phu in 1954. Till this day, most Vietnamese people consider China to be their biggest enemy even though the two countries share the same political ideology.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

simonh 9y ago

I’m sorry, but this is blatant whataboutism. The crimes of the Vietnamese Communists are inexcusable, but so was My Lai. The linked article was simply an American media article about something the American military did. We should be able to discuss it purely in those terms. What another army did somewhere else to other people simply isn’t pertinent in that context, even if in the same war, unless it directly relates to the circumstances at My Lai and the reasons for it happening. You aren’t saying VC atrocities excuse My Lai, or that they caused My a Lai, so how are they relevant? What context do they add to the decisions made by those American soldiers or the army cover up or subsequent investigation? I just don’t see how it would have helped the article other than to muddy and obscure the issues of discipline and accountability in the US military the massacre raises and which the article discusses. The responsibility of the VC for their actions just isn’t a necessary part of that dialogue and is an important and necessary subject, but for another time and place. At time and place in which massacres carried out elsewhere by Americans also simply wouldn’t be relevant, nor excuse anything done by the VC. And no I’m not making any false equivalency. That’s the point.