On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:00:29 -0800, Max Boot
wrote:

On 2/7/2012 6:19 PM, Richard wrote:
On 2/7/2012 3:26 PM, Max Boot wrote:
On 2/7/2012 9:20 AM, Richard wrote:
On 2/7/2012 12:43 AM, Max Boot wrote:
On 2/6/2012 8:25 PM, Richard wrote:
On 2/4/2012 9:39 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

The problem in Vietnam was not politicians getting in the way of the
military. It was letting the military loose to fight in a place where
the politicians should not have sent them.


And then getting in the way...

Nope. The incompetent Westmoreland waged pretty much the war he wanted
to wage.

Civilians always set the political goals. Military men who say they
can't obtain victory within those political goals are just making
excuses. This notion that the politicians prevent the military from
achieving victory is crap.



But I have no problem with your thesis.


Max, you don't know what you are saying.

I do know what I'm saying and what I'm talking about.


I'm curious about where you got your opinon.
Because it's 180 out from what happened.

Baloney. You're the one who doesn't know what happened. What happened
was, the US got involved in an unwinnable civil war. It was never about
communism. We didn't lose the war because of civilian meddling in the
war effort.

It wasn't a civil war. What really happened was that:

1954, the Geneva Conference (The Soviet Union, the United States,
France, the United Kingdom, and the People's Republic of China were
participants) produced the Geneva Agreements; supporting the
territorial integrity and sovereignty of Indochina, granting it
independence from France, declaring the cessation of hostilities and
foreign involvement in internal Indochina affairs, delineating
northern and southern zones into which opposing troops were to
withdraw, they mandated unification on the basis of internationally
supervised free elections to be held in July 1956.

The U.S. replaced the French as a political backup for Ngo Dinh Diem,
then Prime Minister of the State of Vietnam and he asserted his power
in the south. A referendum rigged by his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu saw Diem
gain 98% of the vote, with 133% in Saigon.( American advisors had
suggested that he win by a lesser margin since it was felt that he
would be able to win any fair poll against Emperor Báo Dai). With the
backing of the United States, Diem refused to hold the national
elections, noting that the State of Vietnam never signed the Geneva
Accords and went about attempting to crush communist opposition.

So, it wasn't really a civil war as both sides were essentially
independent countries.

And, by the way, it wasn't a war. In fact use of the words "war zone"
was forbidden to be used in official US reports.

Cheers

John B.