Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuts.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuts!orb
From: orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Adams on Vietnam
Message-ID: <457@whuts.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 4-Jan-86 18:06:21 EST
Article-I.D.: whuts.457
Posted: Sat Jan  4 18:06:21 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Jan-86 05:55:13 EST
References: <4690@alice.UUCP> <1788@uwmacc.UUCP> <1484@ihlpg.UUCP> <1840@uwmacc.UUCP> <949@mmintl.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 42

Being an antiwar protesting veteran of the Vietnam War era, I have
to point out some facts to Frank Adams:
> 
> Let's try to get our stories straight.  We did not put a bomb crater in
> about every square mile of south-east Asia in support of French imperialism.
> We didn't do very much in support of French imperialism at all.  We did
> support it officially, but our interests in the French alliance in Europe
> were (and still are) far more important to us than all of south-east Asia.
> 
 
In fact the US supplied over 50% of the military supplies used by the
French in Indochina.  It is well-known that the US was so keen on
supporting the French and concerned about their potential defeat at
Dien Ben Phu that then Vice President Nixon urged Eisenhower to use
nuclear weapons to prevent a French defeat.  Fortunately Eisenhower
refused because of an understandable concern about the use of nuclear
weapons.  However that did not prevent the US from immediately rushing
into the vacumn left by the French defeat and supporting Diem as
the "legitimate" government of South Vietnam.  The US opposed the
Geneva Accords of 1954 when they were negotiated and also opposed them
in action by supporting Diem in his refusal to hold the elections of
1956 provided for by the Geneva Accords of 1954.  Even Eisenhower admitted
that Ho Chi Minh would have undoubtedly won those elections if they
had been held as scheduled. 

> 
> An interesting comparison: while the U.S. was fighting in South Vietnam on
> behalf of the government there, there were hardly any refugees.  When that
> government lost, there was a flood of them.  The Soviet Union is fighting
> in Afghanistan on behalf of its government.  Guess what?  There are a
> flood of refugees.
> Frank Adams                           ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
 
Again, you are simply wrong Frank.  There were *plenty* of refugess from
bombed areas and villages.  They were forced into the equivalent of
concentration camps in the "strategic hamlet" program begun by William
Colby.  People from villages considered sympathetic to the Viet Cong
were forcibly relocated into these "strategic hamlets" which were surrounded
by barbed wire and soldiers so that they could be "controlled".

  "the truth shall set you free!" 
      tim sevener   whuxn!orb