Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site uwmacc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!myers
From: myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh
Message-ID: <1864@uwmacc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 30-Dec-85 12:48:33 EST
Article-I.D.: uwmacc.1864
Posted: Mon Dec 30 12:48:33 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 2-Jan-86 19:48:36 EST
References: <306@frog.UUCP>
Organization: Ken Kopp's Fresh Seafood Tank
Lines: 49

> No.  We know more than that.  We know that Ho Chi Minh was
> already a committed communist and that he betrayed people who
> were stupid or unlucky enough to collaborate with him.
> Those allegedly far-sighted advisors needed glasses badly.
> 
> 				David Hudson

Ah, now we come to the heart of the matter -- knee-jerk anti-communism.  It
strikes me as quite funny, tho, that one no longer hears sweeping condemnations
of China in the US.

I have four points to raise with respect to David's comments:

(1)	If the heightened state of militarization of Vietnam had not
	been necessary, it is likely that a much less centralized brand
	of communism would have resulted.  It is also highly likely that
	the North and South would have been unified in the 1950's if the
	US had allowed the scheduled elections to take place then.  How
	could such a situation POSSIBLY be worse for anybody than a
	Vietnam ravaged by war for twenty more years, with consequent
	millions of dead and vast economic devastation?

(2)	A guerrilla war can ONLY be won with the support of the people
	of a country...this support was displayed in both North and
	South from the 1940's on.  In the early stages the support of
	the peasantry was achieved thru land redistribution (hence the
	progressive nature of the movement, at least in the EARLY STAGES).

(3)	Someone else brought up the refugee situation before and after the
	war.  I'll need to look into this, but my guess is that, during
	the war, refugees were maintained internal to the country thru
	relocation schemes similar to those being used in today's
	Guatemala.  It wouldn't have done to have had refugees streaming
	from the South (besides, would the US have taken them then?).
	Another factor would probably be that those against the South
	Vietnamese government stayed to fight rather than leave, while
	that was not an option for those against the unified communist
	government.  Anyway, this is something that bears looking into.

(4)	The fourth point is a question for David.  What collaborationists
	are you referring to who were betrayed by Ho Chi Minh?

-- 
Jeff Myers				The views above may or may not
University of Wisconsin-Madison		reflect the views of any other
Madison Academic Computing Center	person or group at UW-Madison.
ARPA: uwmacc!myers@rsch.wisc.edu
UUCP: ..!{harvard,ucbvax,allegra,topaz,akgua,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!myers
BitNet: MYERS at WISCMACC