Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bilow who wrote (133116)	5/15/2004 10:01:02 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (5) of 281500

For North Vietnam to have refrained from violating Laotian neutrality would have been STUPID. From their perspective it certainly would have been. Afterall, they were intent on conquering not only S. Vietnam, but also setting up a puppet communist government in Laos and Cambodia.. My point is that WE WERE STUPID in not confronting Hanoi in Laos. We were UNWILLING to expand the war in Indo-China, but the N. Vietnamese WERE NOT. They were quite content to push the envelope because the US administrations of the time TELEGRAPHED just how far we would, and wouldn't go. And that cost us the war, and surrendered any chances of democratic reforms and economic progress in Indo-China for over 30 years. And so long as they were willing to fight in a no-holds barred manner because their country was not at EQUAL RISK OF BEING INVADED by the South in retaliation, and we fought with our hands tied behind our backs, the South Vietnamese were not going to win that war. I believe that our leadership was stupid mostly in failing to get out of Vietnam earlier. No.. what you believe is that we should have just CAVED IN AND NOT CONFRONTED COMMUNIST EXPANSIONISM IN INDOCHINA. You would have quite satisfied to permit the entire peninsula to fall to them... What's counter-productive, you naive creton, is WHEN WE FAIL TO MEET FORCE WITH FORCE and permit the enemy to have an advantage of interior lines and safe havens. When the enemy violates the "rules", you'd better prepared to match or exceed those violations in a manner than hits them where it hurts and causes them to reevaluate their "risk/reward" analysis. We never threatened to fight in such a manner. And the enemy did. Let me make this very clear. Great powers do whatever they want to do without regard to treaties all the time. This is not something that was invented by Hitler, it has always been the case and always will be. They certainly do when folks like you don't have the guts to oppose them and fight for your values. It's thinking like yours that contributed greatly to millions of people being subjugated to totalitarian repression and economic despair for the past 50 years. Don't you think you owe them an apology? Hawk Hawk Geezus Carl!! This is SO BASIC.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next