Text 13586, 89 rader
Skriven 2005-06-13 19:22:00 av LEE LOFASO (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av ED HULETT
Ärende: Hatred
==============
Hello Ed,

>GB>His working with us during WWII against the Chinese, his approaching
>GB>Claire Chenault who time and again tried to get the US to back Ho
>GB>against the French trying to re-establish their colonial empire. His
>GB>desire to emulate the US at that time and establish a democracy.

EH>We didn't fight the Chinese in WWII.

We fought the Chinese in the Korean conflict.

EH>They were our ally.

The pre-Communist regime was our ally in China during WWII.
During the Korean conflict, the Communist regime ruled China,
meaning China was our enemy.

EH>We helped the Chinese against Japan.

We helped the pre-Communist regime in China during WWII.
Not Mao Tse-Tung and the pro-Communist rebels.

EH>Remember the Flying Tigers?

Remember the Rape of Nanking?  What did we do to help the Chinese
people then?  Did we prevent the Japanese from raping Chinese women?
Did we prevent the Japanese from murdering innocent civilians?  Nah.
We had more important things to do.

EH>France was our ally as well, before AND after WWII. He might have
EH>put on air that his intent was to establish a democracy, but his
EH>actions were those of a tyrrant.

France was not exactly helpful in rooting out the Nazis.  About the
only truly patriotic Frenchman that existed was Charles de Gaulle.
Everybody else preferred not to rock the boat, knowing what would
happen to them if they opposed Nazi presence.  In fact, many of
the French openly supported the Nazis.  Including working in German
factories, making munitions for the German military.  And don't
forget the Vichy government, which was so helpful to Adolf Hitler.

>GB>We backed Saddam, Ed, is he any more cuddly than Ho?

EH>We did NOT back Saddam. We gave him intelligence only.

As well as tons of WMD.

>GB>Ho started to allow/authorize his own people to be murdered in "the
>GB>cause", among a great many other evils.

EH>Ho didn't have "his own people." He was a tyrrant and a dictator.
EH>He lead by fear of death.

Ho Chi Minh was a tryrant.  But he was also patriotic to the
Vietnamese people.  Of course, like all tyrants, one had to stroke
his ego in order to gain favors.  Kind of like what one has to do
in order to gain favors from our very own dictator.

>GB>But at one time, early on, it was different. Ho, at the time he was
>GB>dealing with Claire Chenault, fully expected the US to back a democracy
>GB>movement.

EH>So, you are saying that since we turned him down he became a commie
EH>over night.  ROFL!

Ho Chi Minh sought to undermine U.S. resolve.  And his ploy worked.

>GB>Then the Cold War set in.

EH>Which had nothing to do with our decision to not back Ho.

Actually, it did.  Truman was the first president to send in U.S.
advisors to Vietnam, a direct response to communist actions in that
area.

>GB>Things changed for everyone.

EH>Uh huh. You can delude yourself that Ho was a pro-democracy "George
EH>Washington of Vietnam, but it isn't based on the truth.

Ho Chi Minh understood the value of propaganda.  And he used it well.
And wisely.  To the benefit of his communist movement, of course.

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * My reality check just bounced.
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)