South Korea President warns North Korea against Provaction

[NiceGuy]

It was the British who allowed French to return to Vietnam not the U.S(to South Vietnam, more exactly). Pre-1954, US support to French Army was insignificant. It mainly aimed to help French army and the French people not to loose morale in the process of recovery after WWII. Post WWII France was quite weak and volatile. It has nothing to do with Vietnam directly.
We don't need any one for our independence, we did it ourselves, alone.

Do not compare us with the Filipinos, they're the U.S's old colony.

I just explan to Gambit that: US didn't come to help VN , if they wanna help, they could do it in 1946, not after 1954 when French was defeated.

US came to VN just for controlling Malacca straits and SCS(east sea), but they lost , and now, US have to support VN to contain China and Chinese-ASEAN to maintain free ship lane from Malacca to Japan-US.VietNam war had nothing related to "Democracy" or "Comunism" ,it's just a war of controlling crucial free ship route.

 

[Star√ation]

How did France got back into Viet Nam in the first place? Through the Ho-Sainteny Agreement of March 6, 1946. In that pact, Ho made a deal with the French devil that if France recognize Ho and the Viet Minh as legitimate rulers of all Viet Nam, Ho and the Viet Minh would agree to place Viet Nam into the French Union with Viet Nam being an autonomous region like others in that Union. France then told the US that one of America's allies in SE Asia, the Viet Minh who assisted the American OSS during WW II, invited France to return as colonial master. In effect, America's hands were tied with regards to Viet Nam, Indochina, and UN trusteeship towards independence. Once France completed her return to Viet Nam, France and the Viet Minh proceeded to slaughter any non-Communist and non-France aligned Vietnamese nationalists. Neither China nor the Soviet Union were needed at this time. It was only after the Viet Minh consolidated their power in North Viet Nam that the turn against France began.

Even I find that you're quite a pro-Vietnam member on this PDF and have an in-depth knowledge about Vietnam. But I grew up in a so-called "brainwashing communist education system", you're from a so-called "democracy" nation. It seems to be hard for us to discuss about history since our world view and stand are completely different.

I'm neither a pro-Ho nor anti-Ho myself. I find that Ho did an excellent job when led Vietnam to our independence and drove the French out of Vietnam. But then he failed severely after 1954 for not be able to lead Vietnam avoiding being a hotspot of the Cold War. Only that war with the U.S had totally destroyed Vietnam and divided Vietnamese people.
There's a sentence I've learned from the Chinese "absolute deterioration comes after absolute power". It might be right for Stalin, Mao, as well as Ho.

About Ho and the nationalists, I do not find anything wrong there. In Vietnam, we have a proverb: "secure your family first, then try to pacify the nation". Either Ho or the nationalist could do their jobs of sweeping away all the opponents. Only Ho emerged after the power struggle and showed himself very strong and clever. Then he and his fellowmen represented the Vietnamese people to fight against the French.

Anyway, I find little interest only discussing about the Vietnam War era. We found silly ourselves as to be so divided after the war. It's just a small part of our long time history.
Ho is a good leader, but he did not do any much better than our other leaders like Nguyen Hue, Tran Quoc Tuan...
Vietnamese have a longer, deeper history than just the Vietnam War to talk about.

I experienced in person myself that the Vietnamese community abroad still being so preoccupied with the dark of the past. All the hatred, division... they carried all along. But that's not with the Vietnamese live in Vietnam, it's a young generation in Vietnam, the generation who are ready to put the past aside and face the future.

And what could communism teach us democrats? And please do not bring up the current China, which is a corrupted offspring of failed communist ideologies and capitalist market principles. Without this offspring, China would not survive.

Well, like social welfare, insurance, collective possession, a planned economic system...
When it's about Communism, every one often thinks about Stalin-era communism. Stalin-era communism was obviously a failed experiment but still, there are...

 

[NiceGuy]

But then he failed severely after 1954 for not be able to lead Vietnam avoiding being a hotspot of the Cold War. Only that war with the U.S had totally destroyed Vietnam and divided Vietnamese people.

Brother, you still don't understand the important of the shipping lane from Malacca to SCS(east sea). If it fall in China's hands, Japan-SK-Taiwan will have to listen to China , US will face with great threat in Pacific Ocean, so US wanna control this shipping lane at All cost.

War is unavoidable , Mr.President Kenedy want to withdraw US troop from VN , then he got shot . Mr.President Ngo Dinh Diệm refused US troops stationed in S.VN , he got shot too. HCM just accepted the war with US bcz he couldn't have any chance to negotiate.

 

[Star√ation]

Brother, you still don't understand the important of the shipping lane from Malacca to SCS(east sea). If it fall in China's hands, Japan-SK-Taiwan will have to listen to China , US will face with great threat in Pacific Ocean, so US wanna control this shipping lane at All cost.

War is unavoidable , Mr.President Kenedy want to withdraw US troop from VN , then he got shot . Mr.President Ngo Dinh Diệm refused US troops stationed in S.VN , he got shot too. HCM just accepted the war with US bcz he couldn't have any chance to negotiate.

Malacca Strait was still far from a vital sea-lane in and prior to the Vietnam war. It only comes to stage while China is emerging as a giant trader as well as Japan, Korea and Taiwan emerge as developed and export-oriented nations.
Malacca Strait's got nothing to do with the Vietnam war. In the Vietnam war era, Chinese Navy did not have the capability to tough Taiwan let alone control the Malacca Strait.
More, no one could expect to control that sea-lane through Vietnam.

 

[NiceGuy]

Malacca Strait was still far from a vital sea-lane in and prior to the Vietnam war. It only comes to stage while China is emerging as a giant trader as well as Japan, Korea and Taiwan emerge as developed and export-oriented nations.
Malacca Strait's got nothing to do with the Vietnam war. In the Vietnam war era, Chinese Navy did not have the capability to tough Taiwan let alone control the Malacca Strait.
More, no one could expect to control that sea-lane through Vietnam.

Maybe VN is too small to reach to Malacca and control it, but what happen if China can control the whole SCS(east sea) ?Can she reach to Malacca and control it with Chinese-ASEAN help after that?? US knew China Can do that.

There are more than 1,000 China spies in Aussie now, so how many spies among Chinese-ASEAN community?? any spy got promoted to General like in Taiwan ?? That's the great threat to US , dude.

 

[Star√ation]

Maybe VN is too small to reach to Malacca and control it, but what happen if China can control the whole SCS(east sea) ?Can she reach to Malacca and control it with Chinese-ASEAN help after that?? US knew China Can do that.

There are more than 1,000 China spies in Aussie now, so how many spies among Chinese-ASEAN community?? any spy got promoted to General like in Taiwan ?? That's the great threat to US , dude.

You are overestimating the Chinese. In the Vietnam War era, Chinese Navy and Air Force were virtually non-existence. The Chinese arm forces as you see today are a series of efforts of modernizing China. And China's desire to modernize dates back to its war with Vietnam in 1979.
The Vietnam war had nothing to do with the Malacca Strait, I won't repeat it again.
US officers even didn't know how to pronoun the word "Vietnam" when they come to assist the French.

 

[NiceGuy]

You are overestimating the Chinese. In the Vietnam War era, Chinese Navy and Air Force were virtually non-existence. The Chinese arm forces as you see today are a series of efforts of modernizing China. And China's desire to modernize dates back to its war with Vietnam in 1979.
The Vietnam war had nothing to do with the Malacca Strait, I won't repeat it again.
US officers even didn't know how to pronoun the word "Vietnam" when they come to assist the French.

Oki, so pls tell me what is US purpose when entering VN ??Don't say it bcz of Communism , bcz US knew clearly Ho Chi Minh didn't wanna follow Communism .

 

[gambit]

Even I find that you're quite a pro-Vietnam member on this PDF and have an in-depth knowledge about Vietnam. But I grew up in a so-called "brainwashing communist education system", you're from a so-called "democracy" nation. It seems to be hard for us to discuss about history since our world view and stand are completely different.

I'm neither a pro-Ho nor anti-Ho myself. I find that Ho did an excellent job when led Vietnam to our independence and drove the French out of Vietnam.

Based upon what criteria? He allowed the Chinese to run amok in North Viet Nam to implement the failed Chinese land reform program that led to famine in a land filled with rich soil and agricultural knowledge. France sought to legitimize her return to Viet Nam in any way possible and Ho made it easy for the French troops to land in North Viet Nam. After the division, North Viet Nam continued to be poverty ridden while South Viet Nam, no paragon of democratic virtues, reasonably prosper, as much as any country can under the circumstances. I look at South Korea and Japan and know that is what ALL of Viet Nam could have been. Ho's communists failed the Vietnamese people.

But then he failed severely after 1954 for not be able to lead Vietnam avoiding being a hotspot of the Cold War. Only that war with the U.S had totally destroyed Vietnam and divided Vietnamese people.

Why only the US? Why not the Soviets and the Chinese as well?

About Ho and the nationalists, I do not find anything wrong there. In Vietnam, we have a proverb: "secure your family first, then try to pacify the nation". Either Ho or the nationalist could do their jobs of sweeping away all the opponents. Only Ho emerged after the power struggle and showed himself very strong and clever. Then he and his fellowmen represented the Vietnamese people to fight against the French.

Ho 'swept' the other Viet nationalists away in their own blood using French arms and French troops. Thank you very much.

Anyway, I find little interest only discussing about the Vietnam War era. We found silly ourselves as to be so divided after the war. It's just a small part of our long time history.
Ho is a good leader, but he did not do any much better than our other leaders like Nguyen Hue, Tran Quoc Tuan...
Vietnamese have a longer, deeper history than just the Vietnam War to talk about.

It is only those who found their 'Dear Leader' under moral indictments that these historical debates somehow turned silly.

I experienced in person myself that the Vietnamese community abroad still being so preoccupied with the dark of the past. All the hatred, division... they carried all along. But that's not with the Vietnamese live in Vietnam, it's a young generation in Vietnam, the generation who are ready to put the past aside and face the future.

While that is true, the lessons of the past should give the young pause on repeating the mistakes of the past. Unfortunately, the majority of the Viets on this board seems to be intent on repeating those mistakes.

Well, like social welfare, insurance, collective possession, a planned economic system...

What happened to personal responsibility? Insurance? A free market system and some measure of personal responsibility can take care of that. A planned economic system? Has that worked anywhere? And please do not bring up the current China.

When it's about Communism, every one often thinks about Stalin-era communism. Stalin-era communism was obviously a failed experiment but still, there are...

In the quest to secure all those things you listed as how communists can teach democrats, Stalin-ism and Mao-ism and the other communist based '-isms' ended up bloody and failed experiments. Still want to try it again? But at least this is how you young communists thinks today: Since the large countries are too entrenched in their democratic/capitalist systems, start with the small countries like Viet Nam or Laos and re-try those failed experiments.

Communism is not dead. Never was. It is worse than a vampire. At least with a vampire we know a wooden stake can kill it. Communism is very much like the Hydra of Greek mythology with its many heads living in every new generation, ready to inflict itself upon the world over and over. The Viets here are examples of that.

 

[NiceGuy]

Ho 'swept' the other Viet nationalists away in their own blood using French arms and French troops. Thank you very much.

Show to people their name , don't just consider Traitors as Viet nationalists.

While that is true, the lessons of the past should give the young pause on repeating the mistakes of the past. Unfortunately, the majority of the Viets on this board seems to be intent on repeating those mistakes.

Our mistake is Not kissing US @$$ to get some money ??Thank God, US still helping us now and we still don't need to kiss US @$$ .

Communism is not dead. Never was. It is worse than a vampire. At least with a vampire we know a wooden stake can kill it. Communism is very much like the Hydra of Greek mythology with its many heads living in every new generation, ready to inflict itself upon the world over and over. The Viets here are examples of that.

And your white Boss is helping that vampire now

FB CEO ridding on VN "Beast"

 

[S10]

And if it was not for China's interference, Ho would have been exiled to China and Viet Nam would not have fallen to communism, which is the greatest joke mankind have yet seen.

As if you ever sleep under the dictatorship called China. If anything happens to you overseas, the FIRST thing you would do is cry to Canada. Not China. So now we all know who is the bigger joke here.

Heh, a loser talking about "if X, then I would've won". At the end of the day, you got your *** stomped and you ran with your tail between your legs to US.

I spent over half of my life in China. In fact, I spend more 1/4 of my time still. And you're getting more pathetic by the post trying to paint your South Vietnamese craphole as "democratic".

Guess what? South Vietnam will never come back.

 

[fly2012]

But then he failed severely after 1954 for not be able to lead Vietnam avoiding being a hotspot of the Cold War. Only that war with the U.S had totally destroyed Vietnam and divided Vietnamese people.

I don't think the war was avoidable. Vietnam was the new battle field of the Cold War and no matter what side you took, the other side would attack. Countries around Vietnam got bombed anyway even they tried to keep neutral.

There's a sentence I've learned from the Chinese "absolute deterioration comes after absolute power". It might be right for Stalin, Mao, as well as Ho.

Well in my mind I always thought that he is much milder than Stalin and Mao. Anyway, I think Ho is a good leader that Vietnam finally was united, unlike Koreas.

 

[gambit]

Heh, a loser talking about "if X, then I would've won". At the end of the day, you got your *** stomped and you ran with your tail between your legs to US.

I spent over half of my life in China. In fact, I spend more 1/4 of my time still. And you're getting more pathetic by the post trying to paint your South Vietnamese craphole as "democratic".

Guess what? South Vietnam will never come back.

So tell everyone, if you are in trouble overseas, who would you call, Canada or China?

---------- Post added at 12:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 AM ----------

I don't think the war was avoidable. Vietnam was the new battle field of the Cold War and no matter what side you took, the other side would attack. Countries around Vietnam got bombed anyway even they tried to keep neutral.



Well in my mind I always thought that he is much milder than Stalin and Mao. Anyway, I think Ho is a good leader that Vietnam finally was united, unlike Koreas.

Any time a country allowed itself an alliance, not only does that alliance carries burdens but can also have unexpected consequences. The moment Ho dragged France and China into Viet Nam, the country as the next battleground was inevitable.

 

[NiceGuy]

Any time a country allowed itself an alliance, not only does that alliance carries burdens but can also have unexpected consequences. The moment Ho dragged France and China into Viet Nam, the country as the next battleground was inevitable.

Ho govt. in 1946 was too weak to drag in or kick out any one.

While in the north there was a dual-control between the Vietminh and French, in the south the returning colonial power (helped by the British pacification program)

http://indochine54.free.fr/hist/begin.html
In the South, Gambit's family was enslaved by France with British's help .Of course, Ho was too weak to stop British to save Gambit's family.

But Gambit hate HO instead of White British

 

[Obambam]

In the South, Gambit's family was enslave by France with British's help .Of course, Ho was too weak to stop British to save Gambit's family.

Are you sure? Got any proves?

 

[NiceGuy]

Are you sure? Got any proves?

What proves dude ?? British helped France to return to the South VN, and Ho govt. didn't have a single tank or air craft to stop it, that's history

While in the north there was a dual-control between the Vietminh and French, in the south the returning colonial power (helped by the British pacification program) had taken back Annam and Cochinchine (though there were many areas of rebellion in the Delta, as ever).

in 1946, VN was not the third most powerful military on Earth that could drive out 600,000 PLA troops in few weeks like in 1979 , dude