Re: I am anti war. You stupid evil scum are pro Saddam.
Well, again you've WAY oversimplified things. Indeed, this oversimplification is curiously identical to US foregin policy mistakes. Ho Chi Min, like Mao, would take guns from anybody in order to get the job done. If that meant wearing a Soviet uniform for 15 minutes, then sobeit. Don't mistake that for Eastern-European-style Soviet block "governments". Was Ho Chi Min ultimately a dictator? Sure. A Soviet-style dictator? Well, I'd argue only nominally. I'd also argue that our post World War II betrayal of Ho had a lot to do with shoving him into the arms of the Soviets, just like with Mao. (But in neither case did the association stick.) The important notion is that, unlike in Europe, China and Vietnam never had anything resembling a democracy or Parliament or anything like that. They were still largely fuedal, agrarian societies that weren't really in a position to critically evaluate the implications of Soviet-style rulership (and in fact they probably viewed it as being merely a non-Monarchic version of what they'd always done). BUT...the Soviets were providing guns and money and we weren't. That both countries were really only externally Stalinst for a brief while (ie, a couple of decades) is evidenced by the fact that both economies are as about, in SOME ways, as free-wheeling and as capitalistic as exists these days. Of course, both are still certainly authoritarian and, depending on the subject, oppressive, but this has nothing to do with their politico-economic stance per se, as is now obvious. In other words, the moral of this story is that you can't merely graft on a western political philosophy--in this case Marxism--to cultures that have unbroken traditions dating back to the stone age. It may look 'Marxist' on the outside, but internally that transplant ain't going to take root. That US foreign policy in the far east in in Indo-China during most decades of the 20th century was a complete disaster was precisely due to the views you seem to hold. It's why we didn't back Mao when even though it was obvious BILLIONS of dollars were being siphoned away by Soong Tse-Vung and the Chiang regime...it's why we backed Lon Nol to overthrow Sihounouk (bringing in the Khmer rouge), and it's why we didn't back Ho even though he fought with us against the Japanese. Had we stood back from our prejudices, respected the soverignity of those nations, engaged and offered some guns in order for them to choose their OWN government, I'd bet the era of Soviet-style government in both China and Vietnam would have been much shorter, and in Cambodia it would have CERTAINLY never existed. In other words, YOU (and people with beliefs just like yours in the US government) are responsible for the spread of communism in the far east. Now you and your friends (including, I suspect, the guy who signs your paycheck) are going to do the same thing in the near east: you're going to force many ostensibly neutral nations into the Fundamentalist Islamic camp, because you just don't get it, and think we have the right to interfere. "Well, the Soviets did it and the liberal left said it was great, so that makes it right." Forget it. Stop saying this crap and use that brain. 9/11 sucked enough in this town...we don't need another. -TD
From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> To: cypherpunks@minder.net Subject: Re: I am anti war. You stupid evil scum are pro Saddam. Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 09:35:39 -0800
-- On 22 Dec 2003 at 22:02, Tyler Durden wrote:
If you think Ho Chi Minh was a KGB sockpuppet then you really don't know anything about Vietnam, China, or East Asian history.
He was not a KGB sock puppet. He was KGB.
The indochinese communist party was run from a desk in Moscow, and the guy behind that desk in Moscow was one Ho Chi Minh.
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG tUqRWDkYAq3CLoQkZ14K0qF1d7QxbWlf6d2ZXjZs 43Qc8nduD4tJh6uumE28HC7EsKfnNFvnGEYCCH0BO
_________________________________________________________________ Have fun customizing MSN Messenger learn how here! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_customize
-- On 23 Dec 2003 at 15:07, Tyler Durden wrote:
Ho Chi Min, like Mao, would take guns from anybody in order to get the job done
It is mighty hard to take guns from anybody but Stalin when you are working in Moscow 9 to 5 for Stalin.
. If that meant wearing a Soviet uniform for 15 minutes
He worked behind a desk in Moscow for over ten years in a very senior position, which suggests he joined the KGB as a field agent much earlier. Kind of odd behavior for a nationalist. If you are looking for a nationalist leadership, Stalin's Moscow was not the place to find it.
That US foreign policy in the far east in in Indo-China during most decades of the 20th century was a complete disaster was precisely due to the views you seem to hold.
Containment was a catastrophe from the beginning. The US government should have done what the communists accused us of doing, and provided aid to the resistance in East Germany shortly after Stalin launched the cold war, and aid for the anti communist resistance in China when the true nature of Chinese 'land reform" became apparent. Containment is a strategy that requires one to win or draw every time, at places and times of the enemies choosing. The US army did not win every time, and Vietnam was a bad place and time. With roll back, one could lose some, lose most, or even lose all, and if one launched more wars than the Soviet Union could afford, would still win the overall struggle. Indeed, arguably this was what happened during the second Reagan term. The Soviets were not losing anywhere -- but could not afford it. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Jq9XxD3JlBT5EcJfysZ3Z9MLA4kbYVkDKjq3Wvrf 4Opm3+oP1ir/TfOFhgXW8XuAzWps8FHp6AicowA0O
participants (2)
-
James A. Donald -
Tyler Durden