I was a kid during Vietnam. There was nothing to "get over" for me..
But as an guy who enjoys the study of history and hopes to learn from it, we need to understand the various factors that led to N. Vietnam's victory. The bottom line was they "fought dirty" and we didn't.
You need to read a little more history. South Vietnam wasn't a "country," it was a fiction dreamed up by the Dulles Brothers and their cohorts. Vietnam was a country and a culture before the US was. Try reading the Geneva Accords of 1954, which ended the French-Vietnamese conflict. Here is a portion of Article 14:
(a) Pending the general elections which will bring about the unification of Viet-Nam, the conduct of civil administration in each regrouping zone shall be in the hands of the party whose forces are to be regrouped there in virtue of the present Agreement
mtholyoke.edu
Note too the following passage:
Taking into account the time effectively required to transmit the cease-fire order down to the lowest echelons of the combatant forces on both sides, the two parties are agreed that the cease-fire shall take effect completely and simultaneously for the different sectors of the country as follows:
Northern Viet-Nam at 8:00 a. m. (local time) on 27 July 1954
Central Viet-Nam at 8:00 a. m. (local time) on 1 August 1954
Southern Viet-Nam at 8:00 a. m. (local time) on 11 August 1954
It doesn't say "South Viet-Nam"; it says "Southern". It says that because Vietnam was one country, not two or three. Elections were supposed to have been held in 1956, but Allan Dulles and friends knew that Ho Chi Minh would win, so they cancelled the elections and installed their guys in charge. Later on, when those guys were deemed not up to the task, the US either had them killed or exiled and installed others. This happened several times over the next 15 years or so. Do you think this doesn't count as "fighting dirty?" In any case, it was certainly not just illegitimate to set up South Vietnam as a country, it was stupid. We had no real interest there. And Ho actually was a guy we could have talked to, if we were so disposed. He had no love of the Chinese or the Russians, despite calling himself "communist." Sure he used them for weapons. But the image that was current then was of a spreading blob of communism, if Vietnam "fell" to the communists, so would the rest of southeast Asia. Nothing of the sort occurred. It was a case of lumping all Asians--and all "communists"--as the "same," which was manifestly untrue.
We ignored the cultural history of Vietnam, ignored the deep feelings of hatred of 80% of the country for the 20% that were favored under the French, and tried to establish that 20% as rulers of the south and it failed. Miserably. Predictably.
As a history buff, you can try reading this one too:
doi.contentdirections.com
It will give you some insight into 19th century Vietnamese history. There are others for even further back, but you'll have to find those on your own, if you wish. |
