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: Dayuhan who wrote (108102)	7/26/2003 1:53:08 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Ho was a communist as well as a nationalist. I think the idea we could have turned him or the government he controlled in a non-communist direction by actually intervening militarily to put him in power is/was nonsense.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (108102)	7/26/2003 10:10:16 PM
From: GST	Respond to of 281500

Fascinating: " His main point was that the French were finished, and that if the US supported a nationalist government, that government would be entirely dependent on the US, and that this dependence could be used to move that government in a desired direction. His essential argument was that it is better to try and gain influence over a ship that floats than to take command of one that’s sinking. He makes a pretty good case for it, and later attempts to describe him as a communist mouthpiece do not seem at all consistent with his writings."