No...King was wrong when he said the US government gave Viet Nam back to France.
It was Ho Chi Minh who gave Viet Nam back to France...
Ho
Do you dispute this historical fact? Be brave and say if you do.
"On February 16th, 1945 Ho Chi Minh wrote a letter to President Truman asking for American assistance in gaining Vietnamese freedom. The letter closed with the remarks:
Dear Mr. President
We ask what has been graciously granted to the Philippines. Like the Philippines our goal is full independence and full cooperation with the UNITED STATES. We will do our best to make this independence and cooperation profitable to the whole world.
Respectfully Yours,
Ho Chi Minh"
The Declaration of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam starts:
"All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; among these are Liberty, Life and the pursuit of Happiness."
This immortal statement appeared in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. In a broader sense, it means: all the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live and to be happy and free.
The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, made at the time of the French Revolution, in 1791, also states: "All men are born free and with equal rights, and must always remain free and have equal rights."
Those are undeniable truths.
Nevertheless, for more than eighty years, the French imperialists, abusing the standard of liberty, Equality and Fraternity, have violated our Fatherland and oppressed our fellow-citizens. They have acted contrary to the ideals of humanity and justice.
Politically: they have deprived our people of every democratic liberty…
Due to the fact that Ho had tried every conceivable way to cooperate with both the French and Americans in gaining Vietnamese independence, and all of those efforts had been fruitless, Ho turned to the Communists for help."
"The US generally took an approach of non-involvement in the issue of Vietnamese and French conflict, and in doing so supported French colonialism."
So yes Ho never wanted Vietnam to be colonized and wrote to America for support. America took no action, which in a sense, is supporting the French colonization of Vietnam.
"The Ho–Sainteny agreement was an agreement made March 6, 1946 between Ho Chi Minh, President of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, and Jean Sainteny, Special Envoy of France. It recognized Vietnam as a "Free State" within the French Union, and permitted France to continue stationing troops in North Vietnam until 1951."
Notice the part "permitted France to stationing troops in North Vietnam until 1951"? His intention was never meant for the French to colonalize them, but rather to open up an option and give them the incentive to leave.
Wrong...The refugee flow began even BEFORE the war when the Viet Minh started prosecuting religious leaders, particularly Catholics and Buddhists, for their objections to communism. Are you going to deny the flight of the Montagnards during the war or the 'boat people' after unification??
"Originally inhabitants of the coastal areas of the region, they were driven to the uninhabited mountainous areas by invading Vietnamese and Cambodians beginning prior to the 9th century AD.
Although French Catholic missionaries converted some Degar in the nineteenth century, American missionaries made more of an impact in the 1930s, and many Degar are now Protestant. Of the approximately 1 million Degar, close to half are Protestant, while around 200,000 are Catholic. This made Vietnam's Communist Party suspicious of the Degar, particularly during the Vietnam War, since it was thought that they would be more inclined to help the American forces (predominantly Christian—mainly Protestant).
In 1950, the French government established the Central Highlands as the Pays Montagnard du Sud (PMS) under the authority of Vietnamese Emperor Bảo Đại, whom the French had installed as nominal chief of state in 1949 as an alternative to Ho Chi Minh's Democratic Republic of Vietnam. When the French withdrew from Vietnam and recognized a Vietnamese government, Degar political independence was drastically diminished.
The Degar have a long history of tensions with the Vietnamese majority. While the Vietnamese are themselves heterogeneous, they generally share a common language and culture and have developed and maintained the dominant social institutions of Vietnam. The Degar do not share that heritage. There have been conflicts between the two groups over many issues, including land ownership, language and cultural preservation, access to education and resources, and political representation.
The 1960s saw contact between the Degar and the U.S. military, as American involvement in the Vietnam War escalated and the Central Highlands emerged as a strategically important area, in large part because it included the Ho Chi Minh trail, the North Vietnamese supply line for Viet Cong forces in the south. The U.S. military, particularly the U.S. Army's Special Forces, developed base camps in the area and recruited the Degar, roughly 40,000 of whom fought alongside American soldiers and became a major part of the U.S. military effort in the Highlands."
I don't deny the war between Ho and the Montagnards since there has been disagreements prior to the war involving the Americans. So when Americans came in, they see even more reasons to support the west in its struggle against the north.
So are you saying that South Viet Nam was looking for American colonialism??
You said it yourself here:
The implication here is that South Vietnam turned to America and therefore the South Vietnamese was seeking American colonialism. Not talking about France by this time.
Democracy by its nature of allowing competition and compromises is naturally evolutionary. Do you have a problem with that?
Democracy indeed allows competition by nature, but not the version adopted west. It only gives you freedom if you do as you are told and compete according to their own sets of rule (dirty underarm tactics alert), so what freedom is there if it is hindered by their version of rules? So if it gives so much freedom to compete, then why not let Communism compete with it on equal grounds? Why sanction or wage war on communsm? Contradicting? yes, and I do have problems with that.