 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AJHoward
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 29 May 2004
Posts: 1
|
 Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 4:40 am Post subject: Kerry and Vietnamese propaganda |
 |
|
I've heard that the North Vietnamese played John Kerry's speeches over the loud speakers in "Hanoi Hilton" during the Vietnam War. American POWs were forced to listen to him claim that American soldiers were war criminals.
Is this true? Are there any POWs out there who remember this?
Thanks,
AJHoward |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Although never a POW, thereby having no firsthand knowledge of this, I did read tonight on Newsmax.com claims acredited to Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, who was a POW for some 6 years, that this indeed did happen.
A search of his personal website revealed no mention of it.
The Newsmax article seemed to focus more on Jane Fonda's actions and speech's over Kerry's, but Rep. Johnson isn't too Fonda Kerry either, it would seem. If I find anything more, I will be happy to post it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's probably an urban myth. NewsMax was the same source for the bogus story about Gen.Vo Nguyen Giap saying the N. Vietnamese would have surrendered if not for VVAW. The volume doesn't even exist.
Similar myths have surfaced about Jane Fonda and Walter Cronkite receiving the same praise from the General.
I can't believe you guys give NewsMax any credibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keith
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 130
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | It's probably an urban myth. NewsMax was the same source for the bogus story about Gen.Vo Nguyen Giap saying the N. Vietnamese would have surrendered if not for VVAW. The volume doesn't even exist.
Similar myths have surfaced about Jane Fonda and Walter Cronkite receiving the same praise from the General.
I can't believe you guys give NewsMax any credibility. |
Here's where you can find excerpts from a book by Bui Tin:
http://www.vwam.com/vets/buitin.html
Some excerpts:
| Quote: | Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and would struggle along with us .... those people represented the conscience of America .... part of it's war- making capability, and we turning that power in our favor."
"Our loses were staggering and a complete surprise. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for reelection.
"Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9AM to follow the growth of the antiwar movement.
|
Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sat May 29, 2004 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sparky, if you read elsewhere on the board, at least one member has the actual book where General Giap made his claims. Hardly an Urban Legend. You also have several interviews with former Colonel Bui Tin where he also mentions how they played to the anti-war left after they realized there was no way to defeat America on the battlefield.
However, if you actually read the accounts given, you'd see that mention is more made of Hanoi Jane than Kerry.
As for Newsmax, are they less credible than the New York Times, a bastion of left leaning media that was caught fabricating and plagarizing stories by a reporter?
Just because you don't agree with a media source doesn't mean they may not be credible. Even liberal sources get it right some of the time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Sparky, if you read elsewhere on the board, at least one member has the actual book where General Giap made his claims. |
Not true. He said he has the book but can't find it at the moment. Greenhat said the book where this claim was made is entitled "Memoirs of Vo Nguyen Giap"
I googled this book title and there's only one link. Try it:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Memoirs+of+Vo+Nguyen+Giap%22
Greenhat says:
| Quote: | | Having read it a while ago, I will say that I don't think it specifically mentions the VVAW or John Kerry. I don't think it even mentions Jane Fonda. What it does mention is the protestors in America and how they affected the prosecution of the war. |
But Montana said "Kerry´s anti-war group provided aid and comfort to the enemy (see General Giap´s memoirs),
And Montana also said "his most important guerrilla ally during the war was the America press."
Lew says "However, if you actually read the accounts given, you'd see that mention is more made of Hanoi Jane than Kerry. "
The inability of you guys to get this story straight makes me really suspicious. So does the fact that Greenhat hasn't actually found his copy yet.
Last edited by sparky on Mon May 31, 2004 8:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're grasping at straws, Sparky. Giap's comments are directed at the entire anti-war movement. Bui Tin, part of his general staff, makes specific mention of Hanoi Jane, as well as Ramsey Clarks, visit to North Vietnam.
Spin it as you wish, it won't change the fact that they know who it was the helped bring their victory.
Did you also miss the thread a while ago mentioning the KGBs efforts at discrediting America during that time period? If so, here is the article. See if the claims they sent out sound vaguely familar;
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pacepa200402260828.asp |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Greenhat, the guy who claimed to have the book, is laying low. I'd have thought that by now, he'd have found that long-missing book. It's really looking like the book doesn't exist and Greenhat was assuming that NewsMax was reporting on a real book.
Urban myths often start out that way. Urban myths usually have many versions, like the various ones offered here by Montana, Lew and Greenhat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Urban myths usually have many versions, like the various ones offered here by Montana, Lew and Greenhat. |
Pray tell, how is Urban Myth born from documented interviews and books published by others supporting the claims? Bui Tin wasn't the average in the trench soldier. Why not look him up yourself before you write it off as Urban Myth, your eyes might just open. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Pray tell, how is Urban Myth born from documented interviews and books published by others supporting the claims? Bui Tin wasn't the average in the trench soldier. Why not look him up yourself before you write it off as Urban Myth, your eyes might just open. |
You're right: it's not an urban myth if it's born from documented interviews and (credible) books published.
It's an urban myth when it quotes a book that doesn't exist. Like the one Greenhat says he has. He probably read about it in NewsMax and thought it was safe to say he owns a copy.
Here's what you said earlier, Lew, about this book that doesn't exist:
| Quote: | | Sparky, if you read elsewhere on the board, at least one member has the actual book where General Giap made his claims. Hardly an Urban Legend. |
At least his fellow conservatives are no longer claiming he has a copy. I've made some progress at least. I think you should send him an email telling him to be more careful with his little exaggerations. And he should write NewsMax and tell them to start practicing responsible journalism rather than making up crap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sparky, no one but you and other Bush bashers say it doesn't exist. For me, I will give him time to find it. Since Saddam had 12 years and 17 UN resolutions to disarm and didn't and it is said that Bush rished off to war with Iraq, I think Greenhat can be afforded a few days, don't you?
Besides, declaring something an Urban Myth just because you don't have the material isn't exactly cricket. Bui Tin's interviews support the view as does other comment made by Giap himself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sparky
Former Member
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Odd that such an explosive book and explosive quote has only one reference on the Internet, just a BBS quote like this one.
Try it. Google the title as Greenhat quoted it:
"Memoirs of Vo Nguyen Giap"
Something tells me you're going to give him all the time in the world, Lew. 
That business from Greenhat about how this book is only in Vietnamese was just giving him additional cover, as though *he's* privy to such trivia because he (supposedly) speaks Vietnamese.
Where'd you learn Vietnamese, Greenhat? Were you trying to suggest you're a Vietnam vet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Cry me a river of tears, Sparky. Greenhat isn't where I learned of the quote or heard of the memoirs, he has just claimed he has a copy. Like I said before, you're grasping at straws and trying to play semantics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Greenhat
LCDR
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 405
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sparky wrote: | Odd that such an explosive book and explosive quote has only one reference on the Internet, just a BBS quote like this one.
Try it. Google the title as Greenhat quoted it:
"Memoirs of Vo Nguyen Giap"
Something tells me you're going to give him all the time in the world, Lew.
That business from Greenhat about how this book is only in Vietnamese was just giving him additional cover, as though *he's* privy to such trivia because he (supposedly) speaks Vietnamese.
Where'd you learn Vietnamese, Greenhat? Were you trying to suggest you're a Vietnam vet? |
I learned Vietnamese in Vietnam, Sparky. About 10 years ago. Just as I learned Thai in Thailand, as well as Hmong and Lisu. Oh, and the name above? Is an approximate translation. Understand anything about East Asian languages, Sparky? Any idea what the structure is regarding where things like adjectives go? Or how emphasis is created? It isn't the same as English, which means translations can vary a great deal.
For example:
"Khun kit meuen kwai" is Thai (transliterated using roman fonts instead of proper script) that literally translates as "You think same buffalo". A translator might choose to translate it as "You think like a buffalo", or "You think the same as a buffalo" or "You are as stupid as a buffalo". The last one would actually be closest to what a Thai speaker would mean when they used it.
_________________
De Oppresso Liber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Morto
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 29 May 2004
Posts: 46
Location: Puerto Vallarta, Mexico
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2004 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually it's from a Reuters dispatch of March 30th, 2004 and subsequently reported by Newsmax. Claimed later to be "urban legend" by indymedia which I presume is your source given your politics, Spark The clown posting the retraction at Washingtion Dispatch was too lazy to do or pay for a Lexus/Nexus search on the matter.
More important than the few words from Giap is 1995 WSJ interview that follows:
| Quote: | How North Vietnam Won The War
Taken from The Wall Street Journal, Thursday August 3, 1995
What did the North Vietnamese leadership think of the American antiwar movement? What was the purpose of the Tet Offensive? How could the U.S. have been more successful in fighting the Vietnam War? Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army, received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. He later became editor of the People's Daily, the official newspaper of Vietnam. He now lives in Paris, where he immigrated after becoming disillusioned with the fruits of Vietnamese communism.
Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?
Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said, "We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."
Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?
A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?
A: Keenly.
Q: Why?
A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.
Q: How could the Americans have won the war?
A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.
Q: Anything else?
A: Train South Vietnam's generals. The junior South Vietnamese officers were good, competent and courageous, but the commanding general officers were inept.
Q: Did Hanoi expect that the National Liberation Front would win power in South Vietnam?
A: No. Gen. [Vo Nguyen] Giap [commander of the North Vietnamese army] believed that guerrilla warfare was important but not sufficient for victory. Regular military divisions with artillery and armor would be needed. The Chinese believed in fighting only with guerrillas, but we had a different approach. The Chinese were reluctant to help us. Soviet aid made the war possible. Le Duan [secretary general of the Vietnamese Communist Party] once told Mao Tse-tung that if you help us, we are sure to win; if you don't, we will still win, but we will have to sacrifice one or two million more soldiers to do so.
Q: Was the National Liberation Front an independent political movement of South Vietnamese?
A: No. It was set up by our Communist Party to implement a decision of the Third Party Congress of September 1960. We always said there was only one party, only one army in the war to liberate the South and unify the nation. At all times there was only one party commissar in command of the South.
Q: Why was the Ho Chi Minh trail so important?
A: It was the only way to bring sufficient military power to bear on the fighting in the South. Building and maintaining the trail was a huge effort, involving tens of thousands of soldiers, drivers, repair teams, medical stations, communication units.
Q: What of American bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail?
A: Not very effective. Our operations were never compromised by attacks on the trail. At times, accurate B-52 strikes would cause real damage, but we put so much in at the top of the trail that enough men and weapons to prolong the war always came out the bottom. Bombing by smaller planes rarely hit significant targets.
Q: What of American bombing of North Vietnam?
A: If all the bombing had been concentrated at one time, it would have hurt our efforts. But the bombing was expanded in slow stages under Johnson and it didn't worry us. We had plenty of times to prepare alternative routes and facilities. We always had stockpiles of rice ready to feed the people for months if a harvest were damaged. The Soviets bought rice from Thailand for us.
Q: What was the purpose of the 1968 Tet Offensive?
A: To relieve the pressure Gen. Westmoreland was putting on us in late 1966 and 1967 and to weaken American resolve during a presidential election year.
Q: What about Gen. Westmoreland's strategy and tactics caused you concern?
A: Our senior commander in the South, Gen. Nguyen Chi Thanh, knew that we were losing base areas, control of the rural population and that his main forces were being pushed out to the borders of South Vietnam. He also worried that Westmoreland might receive permission to enter Laos and cut the Ho Chi Minh Trail.
In January 1967, after discussions with Le Duan, Thanh proposed the Tet Offensive. Thanh was the senior member of the Politburo in South Vietnam. He supervised the entire war effort. Thanh's struggle philosophy was that "America is wealthy but not resolute," and "squeeze tight to the American chest and attack." He was invited up to Hanoi for further discussions. He went on commercial flights with a false passport from Cambodia to Hong Kong and then to Hanoi. Only in July was his plan adopted by the leadership. Then Johnson had rejected Westmoreland's request for 200,000 more troops. We realized that America had made its maximum military commitment to the war. Vietnam was not sufficiently important for the United States to call up its reserves. We had stretched American power to a breaking point. When more frustration set in, all the Americans could do would be to withdraw; they had no more troops to send over.
Tet was designed to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly defended parts of South Vietnam cities during a holiday and a truce when few South Vietnamese troops would be on duty. Before the main attack, we would entice American units to advance close to the borders, away from the cities. By attacking all South Vietnam's major cities, we would spread out our forces and neutralize the impact of American firepower. Attacking on a broad front, we would lose some battles but win others. We used local forces nearby each target to frustrate discovery of our plans. Small teams, like the one which attacked the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, would be sufficient. It was a guerrilla strategy of hit-and-run raids.
Q: What about the results?
A: Our losses were staggering and a complete surprise;. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for re-election. The second and third waves in May and September were, in retrospect, mistakes. Our forces in the South were nearly wiped out by all the fighting in 1968. It took us until 1971 to re-establish our presence, but we had to use North Vietnamese troops as local guerrillas. If the American forces had not begun to withdraw under Nixon in 1969, they could have punished us severely. We suffered badly in 1969 and 1970 as it was.
Q: What of Nixon?
A: Well, when Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong [prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, "he's the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn't elect him; even if you gave him candy, he doesn't dare to intervene in Vietnam again." We tested Ford's resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52's in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South Vietnam.
Q: What else?
A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect. |
So Spark, why don't you take your effing Indymedia legends back to your play pen. You can't even burn excretement for combat vets. You're nothing but at Rear Echelon Oedipist (or REMF) to Nam combat vets, so moveon.org to indymedia and take your excretement with you.
let's put this thread to bed knowing, as any thinking vet does, that Kerry is a f-ing traitor.
_________________
"History tells us that appeasement does not lead to peace. It invites an aggressor to test the will of a nation unprepared to meet that test." --Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
