One of your adversaries is missing...(merged)

[chippymick]

I don’t agree. At all.

This week another centurnarian war criminal died. Erich Priebke popped his clogs and got a fraction of the column inches and internet debate devoted to Giap.

Even though the column inches to victim ratio were inversely proportional.

While Priebke’s victims numbered 335 and Giap’s numbered about 300,000 Priebke was universally condemned while Giap was lionised.

This is wrong.

Not once have I seen in recent obituaries of Giap the treatment of the Dien Bien Phu prisoners addressed or the land reform democide. That is the double. War Crimes plus crimes against humanity.

Let the man answer the questions.

If he can.

[500N]

Chippy

In answer to your question, how many on the winning side
get charged with war crimes ?

Very few or None.

He was on the "winning" side.

[hanoijane]

Angry Michael:

And you're trying to prove what, precisely?

Hold any opinion you choose. Based on your reading, personal contacts and life experiences, it's probably the correct stance for you.

I have different opinions, because my reading, personal contacts and life experiences differ from yours. It's the correct stance for me.

My mission here (should you choose to accept it, Jim...) is not to educate, inform or change anyones world view. It's simply to call things as I see them. If you don't like this, don't read my posts. The forum has a perfectly sound ignore function - or so SAS tells me - so use it.

If you wish to engage in knockabout banter, feel free. But neither of us should delude ourselves that what we write here is going to change the perception of others, because it isn't.

Mick, If I had to take a wild guess I'd say you know rather too much of Vietnamese 'issues' to be a Westerner. You're real name isn't 'Nguyen Van Bailed-on-a-boat' is it?

Now come over here for a cuddle...

HJ.

[melmothtw]

Quote:
melmothtw: most of us bored of this a while back
Bored in less than 24 hours?!!!?

Quote:
melmothtw: my chuckling at your comments
I was beginning to think that HJ was the latest incarnation of some of the wind-up merchants/trolls that have frequented this site in the past. There are a few things that just don't add up......

I have a short attention span Roland, what can I say?

To be honest, it was less boredom that prompted me to ask chippymike to wind things up, and more an uneasy feeling I was getting 'watching' all and sundry getting rings run round them by HJ. It started out funny, but now it all just seems a little bit sad.

[chippymick]

HJ

Last I looked a forum was a place of debate.

I’ve looked at your original premise and subsequent arguments and found them wanting.

It isn’t a question of life experience or personal opinion. It is a question of fact. My questions, that you choose not to answer, go directly to matters of fact.

Of course they were all ‘barristers questions’ That is, questions I already knew the answer to and ones designed to be impossible for you to answer without crippling your original premise.

I’m not seeking to change your view on anything. I’m merely seeking, for the benefit of other forum members, to expose the paucity of your grasp of the issue at hand.

Perhaps instead of resorting to advice on the ignore function, injecting lame and irrelevant popular culture references and inviting people for cuddles as a means of deflection, you could perhaps address the issue that you started.

I’ve asked you a number of questions - there has to be some low hanging fruit among them somewhere. How about you have a go at answering just one?

Best regards

Mick

[hanoijane]

Golly, you're a persistent little bugger, aren't you?

I’ve looked at your original premise and subsequent arguments and found them wanting.

Oh sh1t! Are you on the panel reviewing one of my papers?

Sorry, getting frivolous again. I can't help myself.


My questions, that you choose not to answer, go directly to matters of fact.

Yes they do, And yes, you already know the answers to your questions - well, most of them anyway. As do I.

I don't recall suggesting the Giap was renown for his humanitarian views, his compassion for those under his command, his concern for POW's, his kindly disposition towards those who opposed him or stood in his path of independence, etc. He was a soldier who made some hard decisions and accepted personal responsibility for those decisions. Had we lost he would certainly have been 'in difficulty' were he called before a War Crimes Tribunal.

It's also true he was marginalised by the party BEFORE the American War ended and occupied a largely figurehead position since late 1973.

Nevertheless, he will always remain - along with Ho Chi Minh - the father of an independent Viet Nam. For that, we forgive him everything. I don't expect you to.

Now please take your pseudo-research into a country and a people you will never understand and go away. I find you slightly tiresome.

Or...

...we could do the hug thing. Your choice.

[chippymick]

I admit surprise.

I wouldn’t have thought you would pick that one.

I thought you would have gone for Ngo Dinh Khoi.

Live and learn.

I also think that in the interests of accuracy you should amend your answer as to when Giap was marginalised from before the American war ended to before the American War started. Otherwise I’m happy.

For what it is worth I found your comment about whether my name was'Nguyen Van Bailed-on-a-boat' extremely offensive and churlish.

I am not Vietnamese, merely better informed on Vietnamese history and politics than you are.

Although I admit to having an immense amount of sympathy for those that did manage to brave the South China Sea the Thai pirates and rapists and escape the regime.

From that exodus we picked up Luke Nguyen, Caroline Tran, Natalie Tran and Anh Do. So thanks for that. It makes me giggle that, post Doi Moi, the current regime is so actively coaxing the entrepreneurial class that they taxed on the way to ‘bail on a boat’ back!

What was Marx referring to when he talked about ‘collapsing under it’s own internal contradictions’? Please remind me.

Best regards

Mick

[Roland Pulfrew]

'watching' all and sundry getting rings run round them by HJ

Or HJ being found wanting by all and sundry perhaps? I admit HJ is a great wind-up merchant, but running rings? I think not.

[melmothtw]

Quote:
'watching' all and sundry getting rings run round them by HJ
Or HJ being found wanting by all and sundry perhaps? I admit HJ is a great wind-up merchant, but running rings? I think not.

Well, as the psychologist Stephen Covey put it: “Two people can see the same thing, disagree, and yet both be right. It's not logical; it's psychological.”

[hanoijane]

I am not Vietnamese, merely better informed on Vietnamese history and politics than you are.

Really? My Masters was in Vietnamese political history post 1900, my Doctorate examined the political infrastructure required to support Doi Moi. All post-flying my little Mig with a skill and precision that would make you weep.

Does that sound like boasting? It does, doesn't it? Please forgive me. It's not often I take the opportunity to fluff up my feathers.

What was Marx referring to when he talked about ‘collapsing under it’s own internal contradictions’?

Marx was a very silly boy. And quite irrelevant in this day and age.

Though I do take your point about VN starting to wobble. It worries me. Economically we're doing OK. Just. Socially, there are uncomfortable undercurrents. But that's what developing countries do, right? They develop.

I'm spending quite a lot of time in Taiwan at the mo', 'cos they have applied an interesting socio-economic model which has served them well. There's also a substantial Vietnamese community in TW. Sure, we'd like their help, their energy and their skillsets. Is it wrong to admit this?

Now, if you'd like to discuss trends in social and economic development in SE Asia I'd be happy to listen to your thoughts. But please, look forwards not backwards, huh?

[chippymick]

Jesus wept!

I’ve just seen somebody on the wrong end of an argument, (he started) after being flogged like a rented mule ultimately resorting to making an appeal to a higher authority.

Get this!

IT WAS HIMSELF!

Go and give your head a wobble son.

God bless the internet.

Goodnight.

[hanoijane]

Who is this higher authority of which you speak?

Why is Baby Jesus crying?

What was HIMSELF?

And most importantly... Who owns the mule?



I love this forum. It's like a menagerie for all those on the outer edges of reality.

[500N]

"I love this forum. It's like a menagerie for all those on the outer edges of reality."

Starting with your opening post which 2 or 3 of us refuted one part but you have still not acknowledged is correct.

[hanoijane]

500:

Are you referring to post 45 in the merged thread? If so, may I remind you of what *I* wrote?

With Giap being interred today, I though you might like this perspective from an American In Viet Nam.

By Calvin Godfrey for Thanh Nien News:

Quite why you would expect me to apologise for the content of an article clearly identified as being by another author and copied from a Vietnamese on-line journal I have no idea.

However, I suspect you're asking - in your own clumsy way - for an acknowledgement that some of Calvins article was nonsense.

Yes it was. Happy?

Now comes the difficult bit... ask yourself why I chose to post it, knowing it contained not only factual inaccuracies but also failed to focus on the subject of the obituary.

[Lonewolf_50]

You're real name isn't 'Nguyen Van Bailed-on-a-boat' is it?

Was the personal attack necessary?

chippymick, in re General Giap's stature:
A question was asked about his military genius. (I use the term per Clausewitz: a measure of talent in a given field). Like George Washington, one of General Giap's traits that led to success was persistence in the face of both a powerful adversary and the usual firction / difficulty in waging war. Washington wasn't a military genius, but he was a hell of a leader when a leader was needed. You could argue the same for General Giap. Viet Nam needed a war leader in the 50's, 60's, and 70's as that nation tried to establish its place in a post-colonial world: mission accomplished. If they put him out to pasture afterwards, how different is that from MacArthur or Patton?

Mick, I appreciate your points on overall body of work, in particular the abuses of the POWs and use of an army for internal control. The latter was common the third world then, and still is today. Westerners are exceptions to that behavior pattern.

Is General Giap to be condemned? Doesn't that depend?

We Americans generally forgive Washington his slave owning, as he was a man of his time. He sacrificed of himself and his family mightily (and figured out who his backers were, and who tried to stab him in the back at the Contintental Congress ... ) during a long and often hopeless-seeming war against a major world power.

In similar fashion, General Giap knew who did or didn't back him politically. His persistence may have been more important than any genius or brilliance, given the nature of the war. As we Americans had French help versus the Brits, the Viet Minh and NVA had Russian and Chinese help.

Seems that General Giap had in common with many Asians of the 20th century an anti-European racist/racialist attitude. (Of course, that sword has two edges ... ) Imperial Japanese "Asia for Asians" propaganda, and the "Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere" were as much anti-Western as Pro-Asian. Racialist sentiments were a fact of those times.

Does the general dislike for "round eyes" sustain in Viet Nam today, as it does to differing extents in Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. (I've lived in the two latter). Don't know. If you look at Viet Nam's history, a wariness regarding foreigners seems warranted, even without adapting Korean style xenophobia. From what HJ has presented, it seems that little has changed, all smiling faces presented to the outside world considered.

The original OP from 04 october was a report of 102 year old General Giap fading away, as Dugout Doug put it. A week later, on 11 Oct, HJ tossed a trolling line into the JP fishing hole: a political hit piece directed at John McCain by an American.

McCain, warts and all, took the trouble of trying to make peace with his former adversary. I'd have lunch with him before I'd offer a coffee to the cnut who wrote that article.

HJ would, I deem, be good "lunch and cocktails" company, if our paths ever crossed.

All post-flying my little Mig with a skill and precision that would make you weep.

The best pilots I ever met tended to be humble.

[500N]

HJ

No, I was referring to the my comment that the Aussies were not defeated in the AO they operated, in fact the opposite, they passed word around to stay out of it
and someone else's comment about the NV D445 Bn being decimated to just a few people by the 70's.

[hanoijane]

The man who won't explain his name:

Was the personal attack necessary?

I don't know. You tell me. Ad hominems are thrown in my direction all the time here. You have to take the hit and smile.

HJ would, I deem, be good "lunch and cocktails" company, if our paths ever crossed.

Lord, that sounds dull. Couldn't we just grab something at Mos Burger and talk to Taiwanese girls instead?

The best pilots I ever met tended to be humble.

Tongue was in cheek. If my father wasn't who he was, I'd have been washed out at basic. I scared myself ****less. Regularly.



500:

Sorry, my mistake.

I'm not a military historian nor do I have detailed knowledge of unit operations during the American War.

FWIW, I too have heard tell of the desire to avoid contact with Australian troops. It could be apocryphal, but I'm happy to give you the benefit of the doubt.

As for D445, our version is here:

The Viet Cong D445 Battalion: Their Story

I'm sure you can point me to a version somewhere which differs. When you meet your god, you can ask him which was right.

[500N]

HJ

" I'm sure you can point me to a version somewhere which differs. When you meet your god, you can ask him which was right."

I don't need to meet god to know which is right.

Just read from Page 56 onwards in that link about Long Tan.

Now of course I wasn't there but a few glaring mistakes.

1. D Company did not have tanks or APC at the start, they came in at the end from a flank and "saved the day" so to speak. So the D445 history where it says that troops and tanks advanced into the ambush is BS.

2. Read the bit on page 59 about operations after Long Tan, 1st paragraph. It says "not only were they unable to achieve this but suffered heavy casualties".
Well, some large scale clashes did occur but the Aussies did not suffer large scale casualties. The stats reflect this.

3. They got one thing right further down the page.
"as we were continually on the defensive countering the enemy's sweeping operations"

They got one thing right. They clearly identified that Close fire support from the artillery was vital to the Australians.

Edit
BTW, It reads like a Communist propaganda machine book.

.

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by hanoijane

The man who won't explain his name

"LW50" takes fewer keystrokes.

Lord, that sounds dull. Couldn't we just grab something at Mos Burger and talk to Taiwanese girls instead?

Hmmm. Depends upon where we might trip across one another ...

I scared myself ****less. Regularly.

Pilots have been known to do that since Wilbur and Orville began wearing brown trousers.

[dat581]

500N

The way the Australians fought the war begs the question of how would the war have turned out if the Americans had learned from and used the same tactics? The battle of attrition fought by the US played into the North Vietnamese hands as to the US each man lost was a tragedy but to North Vietnam they were just a number. How do you win a war of attrition against an enemy that doesn't care about their losses?