orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (02/28/85)
> David Rubin: > It is irrelevant to the present discussion, but the US was invited > into both Vietnam (by a faction just as large, and far less > determined, then the Communists) and Central America. There was/is > plenty of reason to get involved in both places, though it > wasn't/isn't done/being done in the wisest ways. > The US was "invited" into Vietnam in the same manner in which Russia was "invited" into Afghanistan. The fact is that the OSS gave the Viet Minh, led by Ho Chi Minh, assistance to fight the Japanese in World War II. Roosevelt did *not* want to support the European powers in attempting to keep their colonies. However Truman changed that policy when he was persuaded by the French to support their attempt to regain control over Indochina. For that reason in 1949 Truman began the American military presence in Vietnam by sending a 49 man military delegation in support of the French. To try to gain legitimacy the French installed the former Emperor, Bao Dai, as ruler. His chief adviser was Ngo Dinh Diem. However the French, while they did have some success in instituting control over the South of Vietnam, had great problems with the Viet Minh in the North. Before World War II was over, Ho Chi Minh asked for American assistance and recognition against the French. Truman refused. After the French lost badly at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, they decided to pull out of Indochina. It was at this point that the U.S. stepped in and took their place. The French withdrawal was accompanied by agreements for nationwide elections in 1956, and the re-unification of all of VIetnam under one government. (at that point the Viet Minh controlled the North and Ngo Dinh Diem and the French controlled the South) Ngo Dinh Diem refused to hold the elections in the South. Even Dwight Eisenhower admitted that if those elections had been held, Ho Chi Minh would have undoubtedly won as the liberator of his country from the French. From that point on the U.S. continued to support Diem until he was assassinated. Was the U.S. "invited" into Vietnam? Certainly the French welcomed US support for their effort to regain their former colony. But the French also warned the U.S. about getting involved in the same quagmire they had been involved in. By continuing the French involvement the U.S. was seen as merely an extension of colonialism that was largely opposed by the Vietnamese people. Ngo Dinh Diem, who was installed in the South, was a nationalist, but he had been in exile in the US before returning to Vietnam--he had not fought actively against the Japanese during World War II as Ho Chi Minh and the Viet Minh had. So he had little legitimacy as a Vietnamese leader among the Vietnamese themselves. To claim that the U.S. was "invited" into Vietnam is a distortion of history as great as claiming Russia was "invited" into Afghanistan. Both involvements represent the imposition of control over people who didn't want it. tim sevener whuxl!orb
gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg Kuperberg) (03/01/85)
> To claim that the U.S. was "invited" into Vietnam is a distortion of > history as great as claiming Russia was "invited" into Afghanistan. > Both involvements represent the imposition of control over people > who didn't want it. > tim sevener whuxl!orb I conjecture that it is the case that in every industrialized nation in the world, the Vietnam War got more press last year than did the war in Afghanistan. A remarkable state of affairs, isn't it? --- Greg Kuperberg harvard!talcott!gjk "2*x^5-10*x+5=0 is not solvable by radicals." -Evariste Galois.