SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JF Quinnelly who wrote (12092)8/23/1998 11:22:00 PM
From: Dayuhan  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71178
 
<<You would have installed a government in Hanoi, the same as we did in both Germany and Japan.>>

In European war, you conquer the capital city, the government surrenders, and you start again. In Asia you have to conquer the countryside. The city is irrelevant without it. The Vietnamese who left the north were dominated by those who were associated with the French regime, and would not have been acceptable to the populace. The moment the Americans left, any such government would have fallen. It is extremely important, in assessing these things, to consider the record of the French government between 1930 and 1945. Nobody tainted with that connection could have governed in Hanoi.

Invading the north would also have raised a very real possibility of Chinese involvement. In Korea, pushing too close to that border led to a choice between backing off and using nukes. Fortunatley, the right choice was made.

I agree that the Diem assassination was foolish, but I'm by no means convinced that Diem could have effectively ruled the country.

It would be a great injustice to assume that the Communist leadership that took power in 1975 was identical to that which existed in 1946. Voices of accommodation and reason, which existed in the beginning, had a hard time surviving the intervening years. War has a way of bringing warriors - and extremists - into power.

Steve