4 ms·

Should USA have gone to war against Vietnam?

by jessaustin 4y ago

refurb 4y ago
Who are you talking to?
- jessaustin 4y ago
  War is terrible. Thus, even "good people" in a voluntary unjustified war on the other side of the planet do terrible things. Emphasizing some unprovable triviality like "I'm sure there were some NVA soldiers who fired several shots at USA troops who wanted to surrender" is just a distraction from the only relevant point. The NVA wouldn't have fired those shots if we hadn't invaded. Whatever they did wrong was LBJ's fault. (Sure, it seems unfair to blame him for going to war, when refusing to do so was the reason his predecessor was killed, but life ain't fair.) The massacre discussed here wouldn't have happened if we hadn't invaded. None of the bloodshed, whether "good" or "bad", would have happened. "Shades of gray" has no place in a discussion of a developing nation resisting a violent invasion from people they've never threatened on the other side of the planet. When you parrot this lukewarm on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand bullshit, you distract from the basic point: the worst actions of the Vietnamese during USA's invasion of Vietnam were entirely USA's fault. I'm surprised I have to explain this on a forum frequented by adults. Then again, in this thread we see the goofy idea that there are "good people" and "bad people"...
  - refurb 4y ago
    I'm surprised I have to explain this on a forum frequented by adults It's funny you accuse others of having an infantile view of the war when you seem to be espousing the unsophisticated view of "good guys and bad guys".
    - jessaustin 4y ago
      You: There are good and bad people... [0] Me: This "fact"... in this thread we see the goofy idea that there are "good people" and "bad people"... [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32201608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32201608
  - deepdriver 4y ago
    You're wrong on basic facts. The US never invaded Vietnam. On the contrary, NVA and Viet Cong ireggulars invaded the countries of both South Vietnam and Laos. US armed forces entered South Vietnam at the invitation of that country's (sadly corrupt and undemocratic) government for the purpose of territorial defense. The US specifically chose not to invade North Vietnam in order to avoid war with China, who stationed more than 150,000 soldiers there during the war.
    - jessaustin 4y ago
      The entity that became RVN was specifically created by USA and France to undermine the Geneva Conference and protect Western access to rubber plantations. At USA's behest, the former emperor appointed Ngô Đình Diệm prime minister. Ngô kicked out the French in favor of USA, rigged elections, and instituted policies of anti-Buddhist Christian bigotry. He was never elected in a real election, rather propped up by Westerners because he served their interests. Those interests included his inviting lots of USA military and spooks into RVN. When his service no longer pleased us, we had him killed, and Hồ Chí Minh accurately predicted that his absence would lead to the reunification of Vietnam. Ngô's various successors behaved in similarly craven fashion toward USA. Nothing about the USA occupation was the sovereign will of the Vietnamese people. This was just as much of an invasion as if USA were to occupy Venezuela at the invitation of Juan Guaidó. You should ask some Vietnam veterans about this.
      - refurb 4y ago
        Ngô kicked out the French in favor of USA, rigged elections, and instituted policies of anti-Buddhist Christian bigotry. He was never elected in a real election, rather propped up by Westerners because he served their interests. Have you tried evaluating the North by the same standards? "Ho Chi Minh kicked out the French in favor of USSR, rigged elections, and instituted policies of anti-religious secular bigotry. He was never elected in a real election, rather propped up by China/USSR because he served their interests."
        jessaustin 4y ago

Should USA have gone to war against Vietnam?

refurb 4y ago

Who are you talking to?

jessaustin 4y ago
War is terrible. Thus, even "good people" in a voluntary unjustified war on the other side of the planet do terrible things. Emphasizing some unprovable triviality like "I'm sure there were some NVA soldiers who fired several shots at USA troops who wanted to surrender" is just a distraction from the only relevant point. The NVA wouldn't have fired those shots if we hadn't invaded. Whatever they did wrong was LBJ's fault. (Sure, it seems unfair to blame him for going to war, when refusing to do so was the reason his predecessor was killed, but life ain't fair.) The massacre discussed here wouldn't have happened if we hadn't invaded. None of the bloodshed, whether "good" or "bad", would have happened. "Shades of gray" has no place in a discussion of a developing nation resisting a violent invasion from people they've never threatened on the other side of the planet. When you parrot this lukewarm on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand bullshit, you distract from the basic point: the worst actions of the Vietnamese during USA's invasion of Vietnam were entirely USA's fault. I'm surprised I have to explain this on a forum frequented by adults. Then again, in this thread we see the goofy idea that there are "good people" and "bad people"...
- refurb 4y ago
  I'm surprised I have to explain this on a forum frequented by adults It's funny you accuse others of having an infantile view of the war when you seem to be espousing the unsophisticated view of "good guys and bad guys".
  - jessaustin 4y ago
    You: There are good and bad people... [0] Me: This "fact"... in this thread we see the goofy idea that there are "good people" and "bad people"... [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32201608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32201608
- deepdriver 4y ago
  You're wrong on basic facts. The US never invaded Vietnam. On the contrary, NVA and Viet Cong ireggulars invaded the countries of both South Vietnam and Laos. US armed forces entered South Vietnam at the invitation of that country's (sadly corrupt and undemocratic) government for the purpose of territorial defense. The US specifically chose not to invade North Vietnam in order to avoid war with China, who stationed more than 150,000 soldiers there during the war.
  - jessaustin 4y ago
    The entity that became RVN was specifically created by USA and France to undermine the Geneva Conference and protect Western access to rubber plantations. At USA's behest, the former emperor appointed Ngô Đình Diệm prime minister. Ngô kicked out the French in favor of USA, rigged elections, and instituted policies of anti-Buddhist Christian bigotry. He was never elected in a real election, rather propped up by Westerners because he served their interests. Those interests included his inviting lots of USA military and spooks into RVN. When his service no longer pleased us, we had him killed, and Hồ Chí Minh accurately predicted that his absence would lead to the reunification of Vietnam. Ngô's various successors behaved in similarly craven fashion toward USA. Nothing about the USA occupation was the sovereign will of the Vietnamese people. This was just as much of an invasion as if USA were to occupy Venezuela at the invitation of Juan Guaidó. You should ask some Vietnam veterans about this.
    - refurb 4y ago
      Ngô kicked out the French in favor of USA, rigged elections, and instituted policies of anti-Buddhist Christian bigotry. He was never elected in a real election, rather propped up by Westerners because he served their interests. Have you tried evaluating the North by the same standards? "Ho Chi Minh kicked out the French in favor of USSR, rigged elections, and instituted policies of anti-religious secular bigotry. He was never elected in a real election, rather propped up by China/USSR because he served their interests."
      - jessaustin 4y ago