OT - Why no war.

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Sergio Servadio, Mar 31, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message

    > > Vietnam, 25 years later: Vietnamese immigrants underscore hardship of adjustment Monday, April
    > > 24, 2000 By Bob Batz Jr., Post-Gazette Staff Writer On and around the 25th anniversary of the
    > > fall of Saigon this Sunday,
    Thu
    > > Xuan Vo and his friends ask that their fellow Americans remember a few things. One is that
    > > before the Vietnam War ended in 1975, there were hardly any Vietnamese immigrants living in the
    > > United States. After the communists
    > won
    > > the war and took over the country, hundreds of thousands came to this country, but not as most
    > > other immigrants have. Almost every one of them came as a refugee.
    > > ------------------
    >
    >
    > That illustrates the stark difference between the way the 2 nations see
    that
    > conflict.
    >
    > To us, it was about a worldwide political struggle (communism), to them it was about eliminating
    > foreign influence in their internal affairs (nationalism).
    >

    Part of my point was that if the US pulling out in 1975 helped to lead toward sovereign Vietnamese
    identity and functionality, then why did approx.
    1.25% of the country's population emigrate to the US? And how much more of the population emigrated
    to other countries as refugees?

    Carl Not claiming to understand the Vietnamese psyche, just trying to get a better picture
    of it all.
     


  2. "Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    >
    > Part of my point was that if the US pulling out in 1975 helped to lead toward sovereign Vietnamese
    > identity and functionality, then why did
    approx.
    > 1.25% of the country's population emigrate to the US? And how much more of the population
    > emigrated to other countries as refugees?

    People in the South Vietnamese government who collaborated with the foreigners (us) needed to leave
    or face the wrath of the communists.
     
  3. Arts

    Arts Guest

    On Wed, 02 Apr 2003 01:07:09 -0800, Bluto wrote:

    > I am sure that I have overlooked lots, since I don't have a particularly thorough knowledge of
    > U.S. conquests.
    You forgot Texas. That's a particularly annoying acquisition. I wonder how much Mexico would want to
    take it back?
     
  4. "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    >
    >
    > People in the South Vietnamese government who collaborated with the foreigners (us) needed to
    > leave or face the wrath of the communists.
    >

    That is a lot of collaborators. It would seem more likely if there had been a exodus immediately
    following the Americans pulling out of Saigon, but the second article I posted had a quote of, "From
    1980 to 1997, the Vietnamese population in America quadrupled to more than 1 million.".

    I would think the communists' wrath on collaborators wouldn't take 22 years or longer.
     
  5. Jay Beattie

    Jay Beattie Guest

    "Bluto" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "KBH" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > Name a country the the imperial US has colonized?
    >
    > Off the top of my head--
    >
    > Puerto Rico Cuba Guatemala El Salvador Panama Colombia Chile Congo (Zaire) Liberia Libya Palestine
    > Indonesia Samoa Philippines Hawaii portions of Mexico and Canada
    >
    > I am sure that I have overlooked lots, since I don't have a particularly thorough knowledge of
    > U.S. conquests.
    >
    > You'll note that of the nations I mentioned, not all were officially annexed to U.S. territory.
    > But that does not mean that they were not subject to colonial aggression.
    >
    > Take Congo, for instance. When the Belgians granted self rule to what had been their colony, there
    > were elections which resulted in Patrice Lumumba being elected president. The US executive
    > administration decided that this leader, who was devoted to the idea of the resources of the Congo
    > being used for the benefit of the people of the Congo, constituted-- get this-- a threat to the
    > national security of the United States. They had him assassinated and a more obsequious ruler
    > installed. That man's name was Joseph Mobutu, AKA Mobutu Sese Seko, and he was one of the cruelest
    > and most treacherous kleptocrats of the 20th century. But he did cooperate with US business
    > interests, and he kept his people from developing any regional power.
    >
    > You should bone up on your history. Your government is not among the ranks of good guys if you
    > bother to examine the record.

    I think you should bone up on your history, too. Colonize does not mean "meddle in the affairs of"
    or "go to war with" or "temporarily occupy." It means to settle and in some cases annex. The United
    States has several possessions and a few territories, but the notion that it colonized Guatemala for
    example, is idiotic. CIA backed coups do not amount to colonization. They are rather covert actions
    by a sinister and corrupt government . . . but the best damn government in the world! As far as
    being good guys, no country in the world has done anything nearly as big as the Marshal Plan -- but
    then again, no other country has needed to. And who else has American Idol? -- Jay Beattie.
     
  6. A Muzi

    A Muzi Guest

    > > > > What countries have the young men of your country freed from
    tyranny?

    > > "Nuoc Mam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]wsreader-03.noos.net...
    > > > In 1975 we freed our country from yours.

    > "Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > You mean like this? Vietnam, 25 years later: Vietnamese immigrants underscore hardship of
    > > adjustment Monday, April 24, 2000 By Bob Batz Jr., Post-Gazette Staff Writer On and around the
    > > 25th anniversary of the fall of Saigon this Sunday,
    Thu
    > > Xuan Vo and his friends ask that their fellow Americans remember a few things. One is that
    > > before the Vietnam War ended in 1975, there were hardly any Vietnamese immigrants living in the
    > > United States. After the communists
    > won
    > > the war and took over the country, hundreds of thousands came to this country, but not as most
    > > other immigrants have. Almost every one of them came as a refugee.

    "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > That illustrates the stark difference between the way the 2 nations see
    that
    > conflict.
    >
    > To us, it was about a worldwide political struggle (communism), to them it was about eliminating
    > foreign influence in their internal affairs (nationalism).

    Example of viewpoint variance: Some see the current ability of Vietnam to underprice Chinese labor
    as a positive reflection on the 'success" of their system. I just don't get it.
    --
    Andrew Muzi http://www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April 1971
     
  7. Good article. The last paragraph is particularly meaningful when one considers that had elections
    been held, the Communists would have won (they enjoyed enormous popularity in Vietnam after Dien
    Bien Phu).

    The partition was made in the hopes that the South would remain non-Communist. The elections
    were never held. Given the reasons why our Founding Fathers rebelled, it's not difficult to see
    why they did.

    "Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > > Who is not exactly clear on when the influence of the French in Vietnam became negligible
    >
    > Found it.
    >
    > www.askasia.org
    >
    > The French in Vietnam
    >
    > Background Information Perhaps the most important fact about Vietnamese history has been the
    > consistency of organized resistance to foreign domination. When the
    French,
    > in the mid-19th century, established tentative control over the
    southernmost
    > provinces of Vietnam (which they called Cochin China), Vietnamese
    government
    > officials ("mandarins") withdrew and refused to serve them. When the
    French
    > expanded to central and northern Vietnam (Annam and Tonkin), they were met by a forceful
    > resistance movement led by the educated elite of the
    country,
    > who mobilized peasants to fight the French in pitched battles and
    guerrilla
    > raids. Even after Emperor Ham Nghi -- in whose name the Vietnamese struggled -- was captured and
    > exiled to Algeria in 1888, the movement continued. Ultimately, sheer military force enabled the
    > French to subdue
    the
    > land, if not the people.
    >
    > By the turn of the century, Vietnam was "secure" enough for the French to begin to exploit its
    > resources. Politically, the country was administered
    by
    > French nationals, with the assistance of Vietnamese at low-level,
    low-paying
    > jobs. State monopolies on the production and sale of alcohol and salt were imposed, raising the
    > price of both beyond what many Vietnamese could
    afford.
    > A state monopoly on opium was also established, ensuring large profits for foreign distributors.
    >
    > Huge tracts of land in southern Vietnam were turned over to French
    settlers
    > and Vietnamese collaborators. The resulting plantation system of
    agriculture
    > transformed southern Vietnam into a rice exporting area, while per capita rice consumption in
    > Vietnam itself declined. Taxes of every kind
    multiplied.
    >
    > Mines and rubber plantations were opened with the help of contract workers who could be fined and
    > jailed if they tried to leave their jobs.
    Educational
    > opportunities for the population actually declined during the period of French rule (except
    > briefly during World War II), and legal political participation by Vietnamese was limited and
    > strictly controlled. Protest movements were re- pressed by force, driving many Vietnamese --
    > including the future president of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh -- into hiding
    > and exile.
    >
    > Known for a long time as Nguyen Ai Quoc (Nguyen the Patriot), Ho organized nationalistic young
    > women and men into a League for Vietnamese
    Independence
    > (abbreviated in Vietnamese as Viet Minh) in 1941. Although Ho was himself
    a
    > Communist, indeed a founding member of the French Communist Party, he insisted that independence
    > could only be achieved through the united
    efforts
    > of Vietnamese of all classes and political persuasions.
    >
    > During World War II, Vietnam was governed by not one but two foreign powers -- Japan, which
    > exercised overall control, and the Vichy French government, which had surrendered to Germany in
    > 1940. The Viet Minh worked behind Japanese lines, supplying information on Japanese troop
    > movements
    to
    > America's O.S.S. (Office of Strategic Services), helping downed American flyers escape to
    > China, and -- having received some arms and supplies from the 0. S. S. -- building a small
    > guerrilla force.
    >
    > In March 1945, Japan ousted the Vichy French and assumed direct rule over Vietnam; the Viet Minh
    > stepped up their anti-Japanese activities. By the time Japan surrendered to the United States, in
    > August 1945, it
    represented
    > the strongest political force in Vietnam. On September 2, 1945, using the words of the American
    > Declaration of Independence, Ho Chi Minh proclaimed Vietnam a free and independent country. His
    > hope was that his wartime
    allies
    > would restrain the French from attempting to dominate Vietnam ever again. Instead, the British, in
    > the south, and the Nationalist Chinese, in the north, enabled the French to return. Within a year,
    > the Viet Minh was once more fighting for the independence of Vietnam against the French.
    >
    > Although the United States disapproved of French tactics, the desire to support its European ally,
    > combined with a growing concern over Communist power in Asia, led first President Truman and then
    > President Eisenhower
    into
    > close cooperation with the French war effort. By 1954, when the Geneva Conference brought a
    > temporary end to fighting in Vietnam, the United
    States
    > was paying over 75 percent of the French war costs.
    >
    > Despite the Viet Minh's massive victory over the French at Dien Bien Phu, the United States tried
    > to persuade the French to keep fighting. The Eisenhower administration even considered the direct
    > use of U.S. military force, including combat troops and nuclear weapons. Neither the British
    nor
    > the U.S. Congress was enthusiastic, however. Eisenhower and Secretary of State Dulles ultimately
    > acknowledged the Geneva Agreements, which divided Vietnam at the 17th parallel, a temporary
    > demarcation line meant to
    separate
    > French and Viet Minh forces until elections scheduled for 1956. Ho Chi
    Minh
    > firmly controlled the area north of the line, while the area south of the 17th parallel was put in
    > the hands of the conservative nationalist Ngo
    Dinh
    > Diem. It was hoped that the nationwide elections scheduled for 1956 would lead to national
    > reunification.
     
  8. "Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > People in the South Vietnamese government who collaborated with the foreigners (us) needed to
    > > leave or face the wrath of the communists.
    > >
    >
    > That is a lot of collaborators. It would seem more likely if there had
    been
    > a exodus immediately following the Americans pulling out of Saigon, but
    the
    > second article I posted had a quote of, "From 1980 to 1997, the Vietnamese population in America
    > quadrupled to more than 1 million.".
    >
    > I would think the communists' wrath on collaborators wouldn't take 22
    years
    > or longer.

    The extended families of the people who had already immigrated.

    A good chunk of legal immigration is devoted towards reuniting families. I am not sure that it is
    good social engineering, but it plays politically so that's the way it is.
     
  9. "A Muzi" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > >
    > > To us, it was about a worldwide political struggle (communism), to them
    it
    > > was about eliminating foreign influence in their internal affairs (nationalism).
    >
    >
    > Example of viewpoint variance: Some see the current ability of Vietnam to underprice Chinese labor
    > as a positive reflection on the 'success" of
    their
    > system. I just don't get it.

    It is, actually.

    They still have to perform.

    Some countries in Africa would love to be able to underprice anyone. There is so much chaos there
    that no one can get organized enough to produce enough of anything.
     
  10. "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message

    > > I would think the communists' wrath on collaborators wouldn't take 22
    > years
    > > or longer.
    >
    >
    > The extended families of the people who had already immigrated.
    >
    > A good chunk of legal immigration is devoted towards reuniting families. I am not sure that it is
    > good social engineering, but it plays politically
    so
    > that's the way it is.
    >

    Thanks for connecting the dots.

    Hell, after having lived in Miami (where Cubans have done the same thing) and living in Ft Smith
    (where Ft Chaffee is located, a processing center for more than 50,000 Vietnamese refugees back in
    1975-76) I should have been able to figure it out myself.
     
  11. Jay Beattie wrote:

    > needed to. And who else has American Idol? -- Jay Beattie.

    Derivative format, different name. New Zealand had the first group-oriented one, stolen by the
    Aussies, "perfected" the British and morphed into various configurations by the Irish, including
    boy-groups, girl-groups, groups-against-groups, individuals, rejects and I don't know what else. If
    you check the attribution of the format, you'll probably find it is licensed from one of the media
    groups controlling the British or Irish interest. (Pop Idol was the UK one, controlled by 19
    Entertainment, a British company.) STF
     
  12. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote
    > I think you should bone up on your history, too. Colonize does not mean "meddle in the affairs of"
    > or "go to war with" or "temporarily occupy." It means to settle and in some cases annex.

    Hmmm. That definition would apply to the portion of North America below the 48th parallel, north of
    the Rio Grande, and from the Appalachians west to the Pacific Ocean, plus Hawaii and Alaska.
    Meanwhile, "temporarily occupy" would let the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, et al.
    off the hook. According to your definition, the U.S. *is* a colonial power.
     
  13. Clovis Lark

    Clovis Lark Guest

    In rec.bicycles.racing Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:

    > "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote
    >> I think you should bone up on your history, too. Colonize does not mean "meddle in the affairs
    >> of" or "go to war with" or "temporarily occupy." It means to settle and in some cases annex.

    > Hmmm. That definition would apply to the portion of North America below the 48th parallel, north
    > of the Rio Grande, and from the Appalachians west to the Pacific Ocean, plus Hawaii and Alaska.
    > Meanwhile, "temporarily occupy" would let the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, et al.
    > off the hook. According to your definition, the U.S. *is* a colonial power.

    There are some other territories not being mentioned:

    American Samoa Guam Guantanamo Bay Virgin Islands Micronesia
     
  14. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Robert Chung" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:<[email protected]>...
    > "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote
    > > I think you should bone up on your history, too. Colonize does not mean "meddle in the affairs
    > > of" or "go to war with" or "temporarily occupy." It means to settle and in some cases annex.
    >
    > Hmmm. That definition would apply to the portion of North America below the 48th parallel, north
    > of the Rio Grande, and from the Appalachians west to the Pacific Ocean, plus Hawaii and Alaska.
    > Meanwhile, "temporarily occupy" would let the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, et al.
    > off the hook. According to your definition, the U.S. *is* a colonial power.

    Come now Robert, you well know that France still has colonies. Where do you suppose they held those
    atmospheric nuclear tests?
     
  15. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote
    > "Robert Chung" <[email protected]> wrote
    > > "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote
    > > > I think you should bone up on your history, too. Colonize does not mean "meddle in the affairs
    > > > of" or "go to war with" or "temporarily occupy." It means to settle and in some cases annex.
    > >
    > > Hmmm. That definition would apply to the portion of North America below
    the
    > > 48th parallel, north of the Rio Grande, and from the Appalachians west
    to
    > > the Pacific Ocean, plus Hawaii and Alaska. Meanwhile, "temporarily
    occupy"
    > > would let the British, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, et al. off
    the
    > > hook. According to your definition, the U.S. *is* a colonial power.
    >
    > Come now Robert, you well know that France still has colonies. Where do you suppose they held
    > those atmospheric nuclear tests?

    French Polynesia is a territory, just like Guam is a territory of the U.S. so it sounds like you,
    too, are saying that we're a colonial power. Actually, the more interesting case is the Marshall
    Islands, which were never exactly a territory of the U.S. when we were doing our nuclear testing
    there. We just borrowed the place for a while.
     
  16. In rec.bicycles.racing Robert Chung <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Actually, the more interesting case is the Marshall Islands, which were never exactly a territory
    > of the U.S. when we were doing our nuclear testing there. We just borrowed the place for a while.

    Sounds like Diego Garcia. Let's move the population to a different island, telling them that we have
    determined their ancestors came from there and were moved to Diego Garcia by slave owners. Well, now
    that the island is empty, we might as well use it?

    Didier

    --
    Didier A Depireux [email protected] [email protected] 685 W.Baltimore Str
    http://neurobiology.umaryland.edu/depireux.htm Anatomy and Neurobiology Phone: 410-706-1272 (off)
    University of Maryland -1273 (lab) Baltimore MD 21201 USA Fax: 1-410-706-2512
     
  17. "Clovis Lark" <[email protected]> wrote in message

    > There are some other territories not being mentioned:
    >
    > American Samoa Guam Guantanamo Bay Virgin Islands Micronesia

    I'm not sure Guantanamo Bay qualifies. IIRC, it was leased from the Cuban gummint in an open ended
    lease in 1903. Of course, after Batista was overthrown, the Cuban state took possession all property
    but presumably left GB alone because the US could enforce the lease with its military.
     
  18. Clovis Lark

    Clovis Lark Guest

    In rec.bicycles.racing Carl Sundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

    > "Clovis Lark" <[email protected]> wrote in message

    >> There are some other territories not being mentioned:
    >>
    >> American Samoa Guam Guantanamo Bay Virgin Islands Micronesia

    > I'm not sure Guantanamo Bay qualifies. IIRC, it was leased from the Cuban gummint in an open ended
    > lease in 1903. Of course, after Batista was overthrown, the Cuban state took possession all
    > property but presumably left GB alone because the US could enforce the lease with its military.

    innerestin'. How much is W payin' Fidel?
     
  19. "Clovis Lark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    > > I'm not sure Guantanamo Bay qualifies. IIRC, it was leased from the
    Cuban
    > > gummint in an open ended lease in 1903. Of course, after Batista was overthrown, the Cuban state
    > > took possession all property but presumably
    left
    > > GB alone because the US could enforce the lease with its military.
    >
    > innerestin'. How much is W payin' Fidel?
    >

    Recently it could have been paid in hijacker returnees.
     
  20. Robert Chung

    Robert Chung Guest

    "Clovis Lark" <[email protected]> wrote
    > > I'm not sure Guantanamo Bay qualifies. IIRC, it was leased from the
    Cuban
    > > gummint in an open ended lease in 1903. Of course, after Batista was overthrown, the Cuban state
    > > took possession all property but presumably
    left
    > > GB alone because the US could enforce the lease with its military.
    >
    > innerestin'. How much is W payin' Fidel?
    >
    http://www.historyofcuba.com/history/funfacts/guantan.htm
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...