Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (100054)	6/3/2003 5:24:13 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 281500

Support for U.S. Fades, Survey Says story.news.yahoo.com

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (100054)	6/3/2003 8:36:16 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

In the various guerrilla conflicts you cite, what is the proportion of total killed, by the government, compared to the guerrillas? Kind of hard to obtain those kinds of statistics when one government has fallen, and the other is notoriously devoid of credibility. They certainly wouldn't expose their own atrocities to the world. Nor would they discuss the level of barbarity they showed in Laos supporting the Pathet Lao.. You see, the Viet Cong infrastructure was N. Vietnamese at its mid and highest levels. Since many Vietnamese fled the north, they naturally wanted communist cadre members to be part of that... And obviously many had been members of the Viet Minh, who fought the French. But the level of terror that was inflicted upon various ethnic groups (montagnard, Hmong, and others) were tremendous. Think about it Jacob.. Look at all the people who attempted to flee Vietnam when the US evacuated? They wouldn't have done that if they were DREADFULLY AFRAID of the N. Vietnamese communists and what lay in store for them.. Again: I am not defending the methods of Al Queda (or the Vietcong, or Shining Path). I am pointing out that their government opponents, (who the U.S. armed, funded, supported), used violence just as indiscriminately, and on a larger scale, and consistently killed more civilians. I don't believe either yourself or I have sufficient documentation to discuss numbers. All I can cite is that WHEREEVER Communists took control, the people fled enmasse... First from North to South, and then via any mode of transportation that was available when Saigon fell. Maybe we should be asking some of the Vietnamese who live here in the US how life was after the Communists took over?? And btw, I get kind of sick of how liberals constantly state "I'm not defending the methods of..." when it comes to terrorists and or communist guerillas. What I want acknowledged is that most of the wars of terror and guerilla warfare have been initiated by the Communists. And they have been particularly brutal towards civilians (since creating instability and insecurity is a primary mission for succeeding in any guerilla war).. When the US has attempted to initiate guerilla warfare (Contras), we have been scrutinized to great length. And we have been required by our governmental system to organize them as a military, not as terrorist cells. And ever since the mid-70's we have been forbidden to teach assassination. What the US has been guilty of is providing the tools and methods for the existing government (often dictatorial) to defend itself, which has often led to internal repression, internally directed assassination, mutiliation.. etc (with US officials turning a blind eye since they weren't directing it).. All in the interest of avoiding totalitarianism from taking root.. and hoping to effect change in the authoritarian regime later on when things have stabilized. Whatever the US has been guilty of, the record of HISTORY DEMANDS that that people MUST acknowledge that communism, like Nazism, has been one of the bloodiest forms of government ever to exist on this planet. And I don't see liberals being willing to acknowledge that.. But when I do, I'll certainly be willing to lend their opinions more credibility. Hawk Hawk