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: Neocon who wrote (141613)	7/27/2004 1:02:22 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

>> but it does not at all contradict my account of pursuit of containment, lesser evilism, and our sense of honor, rather than material interests, animating our intervention. Really?!! So exactly what honorable principles do we believe in? "Freedom, Justice, and pursuit of happiness so long as it works in our favor"? Somehow I don't recall the provisos being advertised. Let's go over this in a little more detail: - On the Northern side we have someone who starts out as a staunch independent nationalist who believes in democratic reforms. - A war hero who frees the country from the foreign invasion and who provides for substantial gains in the lives of the people. - A government that increases the literacy rate to 90% - And someone who by all accounts is dedicated to improving the lives of his people. Now we oppose this nationalist movement because it tailors itself into something that it believes most of the population (i.e. the farmers) will support (i.e. land reform). This strikes me as something that most governments should do anyway (that is fashion themselves according to the wishes of the public). And in its place we support a puppet government that has the support of less than half of its population and in the process we cause countless death and atrocities. Tell me how good was the Southern government and why it was the lesser evil for the Vietnamese? Incidentally, you are not considering several important facts: The Communist party did at some point dissolve itself. The political prisoners were freed after a short period of time. There was every indication that if we had not so blatantly supported the undemocratic government of the south, the north would have relied less and less on Communism. And that the so-called "domino theory" was a total hoax given that Vietnam did become Communist and the world did not turn into hell on earth. Also missing from this discussion is the covert military actions of the US and the blatant support for anti-north terrorism. [edit I mean prior to 1958, while there was suppose to be civil discourse] Show me how we supported the most noble of solutions. What exactly was the Diem regime doing that was better than what Ho was doing? You do understand that when we support terrorism when it suites us, when we prevent elections where the results is not to our liking, where we help brutal thugships with their fiendish operations against any kind of reform movement, then the rest of the world will not just take our word for it that we are as noble as you say we are. ST