How Vietnamese still suffer thanks to America. Documentary

[xesy]

What is as disturbing, if not more, is the fact that the larger US population and regime remain unapologetic of the savagery and brutality the US inflicted upon Vietnam. A similar disgusting attitude is observable here.

That's why it is a rule that one should at least as much biting/retaliation power to reason with the US regime. Only the pure understanding of being inflicted harm will bring them to certain level of sanity.

Some of your Chinese fellows claimed that US withdrew its troops from VN not because VN achieved victories, but because of anti-war movement inside US. That alone was enough of evidence that US citizens acknowledged the brutality of war to both side. Furthermore there are several efforts comming from US and other nations to fix the damage of the war. There are US funding effort to clean up Agent Orange in Da Nang, a British - US joint committe to find and disarm bomb left from the war, and charity funds for Agent Orange victim.

Of course the modern generation ( born from 1970 onwards) hardly feel any remorse or shames about US brutalities, because neither VNese nor American in that generation experienced the terror of war caused by both sides. So it's fine for them to be ignorant about that. The purpose of history class is not to provoke hatred and vengence, but to make younglings know about historical facts, and learn something from it.

We are VNese. We forgive but we don't forget. Please don't apply your standards to us.

 

[Jlaw]

what is wrong with you.?

Chinese is true beggar when you begged UdSSR and USA in cold war.

Read your countrymen's posts. Give us kilo, give us nukes, give us tow missile, give us investments, give , give,...

Yes, yes we viets like to receive. If that ain't beggars mentality, i don't know what is.

that scumbag PM better keep his promises to the Scottish people

PM and promises should not be used in the same sentence.

 

[Cossack25A1]

It wasn't exclusively used in Vietnam.
Agent Orange - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Use outside Malaya and Vietnam

3.1 Australia
3.2 Brazil
3.3 Cambodia
3.4 Canada
3.5 Guam
3.6 Korea
3.7 Laos
3.8 New Zealand
3.9 Philippines
3.10 Johnston Atoll
3.11 Okinawa, Japan
3.12 Thailand
3.13 United States

Agent Orange was "used" here in the PH?

Reading further, this was used for studying its effect back in the 60s for research...in the midst of the Vietnam War.

 

[terranMarine]

Read your countrymen's posts. Give us kilo, give us nukes, give us tow missile, give us investments, give , give,...

Yes, yes we viets like to receive. If that ain't beggars mentality, i don't know what is.




PM and promises should not be used in the same sentence.

According to VN dictionary, Deng shaking hands with Carter is called begging. These Vietcongs demanding Russia, America and Japan to give them nukes/missiles/destroyers/investments is called free lunch

 

[Jlaw]

According to VN dictionary, Deng shaking hands with Carter is called begging. These Vietcongs demanding Russia, America and Japan to give them nukes/missiles/destroyers/investments is called free lunch

I guess the Americans, Russians better get to it. They wouldn't want to make vietnam angry because you know, America won't like it if Viets get angry.

 

[NiceGuy]

21.09.2014

50 years after the US military intervention in the Vietnam War, the weapons it used continue to harm the local population. Unexploded mines still take lives and the consequences of “Agent Orange” claim new victims. A defoliant used by the US Air Force to destroy forests where Vietcong guerrilla fighters were taking cover, “Agent Orange” is highly toxic to humans. The chemical not only severely harmed the health of those immediately exposed to it, but also led to birth defects in subsequent generations. Its impact is still being felt in Vietnam, where it is estimated that around 5 million people are suffering from its damaging effects. They call it their “orange pain.”

Bcz of our special location, so we always have to fight against the enemies for the right to live in our own land. We hope US will admit that VN War is their big mistake, and hope they will do something to heal our pain.

According to VN dictionary, Deng shaking hands with Carter is called begging. These Vietcongs demanding Russia, America and Japan to give them nukes/missiles/destroyers/investments is called free lunch

US history record that China begged for US's protection in 1979

Amid doubt that China would invade, Deng Xiaoping travelled to Washington to brief
President Carter on China's attack plans. Carter approved the Chinese invasion,
"protected" China from Soviet counterattack and pushed China for restraint.
The "worst possible case" of a nuclear war between China
and the Soviet Union was averted.
9/11 intelligence; China invades Vietnam

 

[NP-complete]

I find it strange that humans are so eager to exterminate perfectly healthy and able people in conflicts but hesitate to euthanize people with severe abnormalities as shown in this video who will suffer all their lives.

 

[kolinsky]

Bcz of our special location, so we always have to fight against the enemies for the right to live in our own land. We hope US will admit that VN War is their big mistake, and hope they will do something to heal our pain.


US history record that China begged for US's protection in 1979

You have to fight against the enemies for the right to live, so have to be killed in battlefield? What is the logic?
Maybe you are in a delimma that anyway you have to die, so the US heal you by giving you more guns not medicine?
The only way to stop your pain is give you a gun, I think they are asking you to suicide, then the pain stopped, and you are in the paradise.

My dear, if you are ill and pain. It is time to take medicine.

 

[NiceGuy]

You have to fight against the enemies for the right to live, so have to be killed in battlefield? What is the logic?
Maybe you are in a delimma that anyway you have to die, so the US heal you by giving you more guns not medicine?
The only way to stop your pain is give you a gun, I think they are asking you to suicide, then the pain stopped, and you are in the paradise.

My dear, if you are ill and pain. It is time to take medicine.

Many Chinese will get killed by US if u wanna get back the right to live in Taiwan, too.

Bcz u r coward, dare not stand up and fight, thats why u guys will finally end up like Ah Q

 

[kolinsky]

Many Chinese will get killed by US if u wanna get back the right to live in Taiwan, too.

Bcz u r coward, dare not stand up and fight, thats why u guys will finally end up like Ah Q

What are you fighting for? If you are not coward, then donot stop fighting, you should go to Cambodia, why you come back. Go and continue the war against Taihland. Please never stop fighting, if fighting brings you more. Before you go to Cambodia, send e a message, I am planing exporting conffins to Viet Nam, that will make big money.

 

[William Hung]

No, the North Vietnamese were the victims of something far more insidious, namely, the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union. The South was under the sphere of influence of the US. Witness the results, even decades later:

View attachment 73090

According to this RAND study, South Vietnam's GDP grew at a CAGR of 15% between 1960-1967, and in 1968, had a GDP/capita comparable with South Korea, despite dedicating three times the percent of budget to defense that South Korea did. We all know how South Korea turned out, and we can only speculate about South Vietnam, but we do know how a unified Vietnam turned out under the Communists (i.e. Soviet influence).

This seems to be a clear case of selective reasoning. Let me try to get you straight. You showed some economic data of South VN from the 60s and from 2000s onwards. Then you credit these positive data to one factor: US influences on SVN during the 60s.

Your argument then seem to allude that SK is enjoying its economical success today due to the same factor: being under the US sphere of influence.

So now let us try to bring in some relevant facts into this debate:

1. As far as I know, the Saigon area was VN's economical hub long before the US had any influence there. The French has established Saigon as their Indochinese colony's main centre of economic activity decades before any US Marines or advisors step foot on VN. Perhaps, SVN has already established itself as a major trading center before its colonisation.

2. During the early 50s (before US officially involved itself in the VN war), a mass exodus of educated Viet elites migrated down south, most likely bringing with them their wealth (minus their land), knowledge and education.

But let's forget all about these socio-cultural and historical factors, let's attribute the economic success of the South (relative to the North) to one factor only: the US influence on SVN during the 60s. This seems to be your reasoning. You are making it like SVN was a poor backwater region before the 60s and as soon as it went under the influence of the US, then BOOM, their economy exploded. And it even sound more absurd to credit SVN's economic success from 2000s (relative to the north) to the same single factor of being under US sphere of influence during the 60s.

Lets look at the case of S Korea. They went through an economic miracle, no doubt. No one would deny this. And no doubt they had a lot of aid and assistance from the US. But again, you seem to ignore their other socio-cultural factors and credit it solely on US influences.

You seem to also ignore other countries that were under the US sphere of influence but didn't do so well. The Philippines was economically better than S Korea in the 60s, but then took a dive from there. They were still officially under the US sphere of influence from 1960-1990. Will you then blame their economic failure on the US influence? or will you then conveniently ignore this US-influence factor and now focus on other socio-cultural and historical factors to explain their failure?

 

[Aepsilons]

You seem to also ignore other countries that were under the US sphere of influence but didn't do so well. The Philippines was economically better than S Korea in the 60s, but then took a dive from there. They were still officially under the US sphere of influence from 1960-1990. Will you then blame their economic failure on the US influence? or will you then conveniently ignore this US-influence factor and now focus on other socio-cultural and historical factors to explain their failure?

The problem with the Philippines was that the policies of the late President Ferdinand E. Marcos harbored a culture of cronyism and nepotism. This was anti-thetic to the Meritocracy that was paramount during the early years of the Philippine Republic, as seen during the time of Quezon, Laurel, Magsaysay, Garcia et al. Prior to Marcos the Philippines was a shining example of a post-independent Asian republic; a democracy in work.

But I am optimistic about the Filipinos. They have a habit of making things work out in the end.

 

[William Hung]

The problem with the Philippines was that the policies of the late President Ferdinand E. Marcos harbored a culture of cronyism and nepotism. This was anti-thetic to the Meritocracy that was paramount during the early years of the Philippine Republic, as seen during the time of Quezon, Laurel, Magsaysay, Garcia et al. Prior to Marcos the Philippines was a shining example of a post-independent Asian republic; a democracy in work.

I'm not doubting that their internal political turmoil played a large factor why their economy took a dive. I was simply trying to dispute Leveragedbuyout's selective reasoning in trying to correlate economic performances to one variable only: whether a country is under the influence of the US or not. At least, this is my perception when reading his argument that I quoted.

Simply put, being under the US sphere of influence is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for economic success. There are other more important factors or variables that needs to take into account.

It is not a sufficient condition because the Philippines was still officially under US influence when their economy took a huge dive.

It is not a necessary condition either because PRC had an economic miracle of their own during the 2000s and they weren't under the US sphere of influence.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Yes, what about these countries? Except for Mexico, every country is a member of the Non-Aligned Movement, so they are explicitly outside of the US sphere of influence. Most reasonable people would not consider Mexico to be impoverished.

Next time, explicitly explain your rationale for bringing these countries into the discussion. I can also name random countries, but it doesn't contribute anything to the discussion.



No, the North Vietnamese were the victims of something far more insidious, namely, the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union. The South was under the sphere of influence of the US. Witness the results, even decades later:


And thus all the more reason to turn to the US instead of the USSR and China, but I cannot justify the thought process of Communist leadership. The USSR and China were poor for far longer than they needed to be because of their incompetent Communist leaderships. Moreover, they were unable to help their satellites develop economically. What are you arguing, exactly? I thought we were talking about why Vietnam is turning towards the US.

It takes alot to transform a massive nation from agriculture to industry especially when the nation is both large and devastated from war. The KMT regime looted China after its defeat and took 400 tons of gold reserves to Taiwan after utilizing scorched earth tactics. That was on top of systematic Japanese looting, destruction and genocide. The state of China in 1949 was worse than the state of China in 1909 except for one thing: there was a united leadership. The USSR was devastated after WW2, losing 20% of its population and most of its infrastructure. The industrial infrastructure of both nations was destroyed, and in China's case, this destruction was even more severe because China only *hosted* this infrastructure, it did not have the blueprints needed to rebuild it. The US aid mostly was used to give weapons and pay to the KMT military, it was not used for industrial buildup.

Egypt is a US ally and has been for over 30 years, Thailand for over 40. Why do you ignore those? Liberia copied the US constitution. Nigeria copied the British model of government. Both have received significant US aid in the past 50 years. Why are they all unsuccessful?

South Vietnam was prosperous even under French colonization - does that mean France would've been even better equipped to help Vietnam than the US?

Germany was not devastated after WW1. WW1 barely touched German infrastructure since Germany launched expeditionary warfare into France. Instead what happened was that WW1 *disarmed* Germany without taking away any of its industrial infrastructure. Singapore is a tiny city at a strategic location. Anyone could make it work. Witness Hong Kong - whether it was British or Chinese rule is irrelevant, the city develops at the same rate, simply because it is a small city at a strategic location.

 

[Aepsilons]

I'm not doubting that their internal political turmoil played a large factor why their economy took a dive. I was simply trying to dispute Leveragedbuyout's selective reasoning in trying to correlate economic performances to one variable only: whether a country is under the influence of the US or not. At least, this is my perception when reading his argument that I quoted.

Simply put, being under the US sphere of influence is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for economic success. There are other more important factors or variables that needs to take into account.

It is not a sufficient condition because the Philippines was still officially under US influence when their economy took a huge dive.

It is not a necessary condition either because PRC had an economic miracle of their own during the 2000s and they weren't under the US sphere of influence.

Yes, you're right that the Philippines' political issues , namely its constant internal strife with communist insurgencies, muslim separatists took a toll. Despite that, tho, they're doing good in the recent 10 years in regards to economic development. Let us not refrain from acknowledging that it was only in 1986 that they were able to repudiate the Marcos Regime. It was under the regime of Cory Aquino where she encouraged the large economic families to liberalize their holdings, which was allowed only after Marcos was removed from power (who supported a policy of strict government control of market policies, holdings). So from an objective perspective, we see that within the past some 28 years-- the Filipinos have done good for themselves. To this day they are the 2nd fastest growing economy in the Asia-Pacific and the fastest in ASEAN.They are considered a rising Asian Tiger economy, at present.

Lastly, I would like to say that perhaps @LeveragedBuyout was indirectly referring to nations that had historical western influence. In ASEAN alone I can count the success of Singapore, Malaysia and to some degree even Thailand.