Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 23:07:07 -0400
Paul J. Adam wrote:

> In article <4.2.0.58.19990716082051.0098d810@*****.engin.umich.edu>,
> Sommers <sommers@*****.edu> writes
> >But how often does that work? The US had all of the high-end military gear
> >in Vietnam. The North Vietnamese didn't have a lot of gear at all.
>
> I am acquainted with a number of pilots who would strongly disagree with
> that statement.
>
> > The
> >South Vietnamese, and the US forces were certainly not above the occasional
> >atrocities. The more they were kicked when they were down, the more they
> >got up to fight.
>
> Bear in mind that the victorious North Vietnamese were _not_ civilians
> with personal weapons: the North was extensively equipped with modern
> Soviet air defences, aircraft, artillery, and armour.
>
> <SNIP AFGHANISTAN. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN IT . . . much>

OK. One of my courses in College last semester was on guerilla warfare. We
discovered the secret to the "loss" in Viet Nam was, generally, because of 1
main
factor. It was NOT the "atrocities" perpetrated upon the South Vietnamese
people.
It was the Ho Chi Minh Trail. That little route allowed the North Vietnamese to
just walk on down into the South, bringing reinforcements and supplies. One of my
teacher's contentions was that if the US had, instead of bombing, just started at
the border and MARCHED across Laos and Cambodia and HELD THE LINE, the Viet Cong
would have been exterminated and South Vietnam would be on the road to true
democracy.

I put loss in quotes because the US military DIDN'T lost the Vietnam
conflict. They did what they were supposed to do: keep the South Vietnamese
afloat and "free and democratic". At the signing of the Peace Accords (whatever
they were) the US said that if the North attacked the South, it would attack the
North again. The North started the fighting again, the politicians did nothing.
The South fought valiantly, but was overwhelmed. The government of the good ole'
US of A allowed South Viet Nam to be invaded. It did nothing. It was the greatest
and grossest violation by the government that I have EVER heard of. And that's
all I have to say about that. Any who would like to debate me, you are free to.


--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+ M-
Message no. 2
From: Arcady arcady@***.net
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 10:51:07 -0700
> At 23.07 07-16-99 -0400, you wrote:
> > OK. One of my courses in College last semester was on guerilla
> warfare. We
>
> Where do you go to school, and do they have dorms and a computer
> engineering/science major?

One of my brother's textbooks when he was at UC Berkeley in a political
science class was a CIA field manual that was printed for training the
Contra's in Nicaragua.
It had lots of cool stuff like wear the militaries uniforms when go into
villages and then kill a few people and rape a few women. A definite book to
give you shivers.
Message no. 3
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 18:27:02 +0100
In article <378FF35A.82B99451@***.com>, Strago <strago@***.com>
writes
>Paul J. Adam wrote:
>> Bear in mind that the victorious North Vietnamese were _not_ civilians
>> with personal weapons: the North was extensively equipped with modern
>> Soviet air defences, aircraft, artillery, and armour.
>>
> OK. One of my courses in College last semester was on guerilla warfare. We
>discovered the secret to the "loss" in Viet Nam was, generally, because of 1
main
>factor. It was NOT the "atrocities" perpetrated upon the South Vietnamese
people.
>It was the Ho Chi Minh Trail. That little route allowed the North Vietnamese to
>just walk on down into the South, bringing reinforcements and supplies. One of my
>teacher's contentions was that if the US had, instead of bombing, just started at
>the border and MARCHED across Laos and Cambodia and HELD THE LINE, the Viet
>Cong
>would have been exterminated and South Vietnam would be on the road to true
>democracy.

"True democracy" would have seen Ho Chi Minh elected in 1956.


As for invading Laos and Cambodia - that would have given the USSR
precedent to move into Pakistan in 1984 or thereabouts. Good idea?
Probably not, on balance...


Not to mention the fact that such would be an invasion, pure and simple,
and what happens when the sovereign heads of those nations invite PRC or
USSR troops in to defend their borders from US imperialism? Do you start
shooting, or back down?

You're still stuck with the problem of a well-supported insurgency in the
South, backed by the NVA (who were the main force from 1968 anyway)
and the fact that the South Vietnamese government was at worst a
military dictatorship and at best, elected in a miasma of ballot-box
stuffing.


It's an attractively simplistic answer, but it assumes the conflict occurs in a
vacuum.

> I put loss in quotes because the US military DIDN'T lost the Vietnam
>conflict. They did what they were supposed to do: keep the South Vietnamese
>afloat and "free and democratic".

Only if bouncing from coup to coup is "democracy".

>At the signing of the Peace Accords (whatever
>they were) the US said that if the North attacked the South, it would attack the
>North again. The North started the fighting again, the politicians did nothing.
>The South fought valiantly, but was overwhelmed.

In large measure because a large chunk of South Vietnam didn't really care
for the Saigon regime.


About the only practical "win" result in Vietnam would have been for the
US to throw its weight behind Ho Chi Minh from the start: back him
against the French and have him be an ally. That would have needed too
much of a change in US anticommunist paranoia of the time, though...

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 4
From: Mist Warrior themistwarrior@********.com.au
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 09:50:09 +1000
> IronRaven wrote:
>
> > At 23.07 07-16-99 -0400, you wrote:
> > > OK. One of my courses in College last semester was on
guerilla
> > warfare. We
> >
> > Where do you go to school, and do they have dorms and a
computer
> > engineering/science major?
> >

>Strago Wrote..

> I go to Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. There are
dorms, and
> there is a computer science major. The teacher's name was Dr. Tony
Joes. He
> actually wrote the book. It's called: Modern Guerrilla Insurgency by
Anthony
> James Joes. It discusses in depth the Greek Civil War of the 1940s,
the two
> wars in the Phillipines, the French Viet Nam, Viet Nam, and
Afghanistan.


I actually did my G/Warfare courses living in the jungle, sleeping in
holes in the ground 6' long x 18"deep and 2'6" wide. All my lecturers
were Veterans of South Vietnam, Borneo, Malaya...and in one notable
case, all three. The were no majors apart from "you are not here to
die for your Flag, Country etc....You are here to make the other
Ba......ds die for theirs. All in all, an eye opener. No Computers,
and the only Engineers were laying explosives.

Quote of Note;
Journalist.."what do you think makes Australian Soldiers so effective
Jungle Fighters?"

Warrant Officer Instructor.."In most countries around the world, the
Soldiers are taught that the jungle is a dark forbidding place with
lots of things lurking in the Dark......We teach our Soldiers to go
out and do the Lurking!!"

Mist Warrior.
Message no. 5
From: Aaron Binns sparrow@***.net.au
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 11:49:31 +1000
Strago Wrote In His Long-Winded Style:

> > I go to Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. There are
> dorms, and
> > there is a computer science major. The teacher's name was Dr. Tony
> Joes. He
> > actually wrote the book. It's called: Modern Guerrilla Insurgency by
> Anthony
> > James Joes. It discusses in depth the Greek Civil War of the 1940s,
> the two
> > wars in the Phillipines, the French Viet Nam, Viet Nam, and
> Afghanistan.

I hope this is a military academy / university.. else I wish we had those
subjects in normal Uni's down here....


> I actually did my G/Warfare courses living in the jungle, sleeping in
> holes in the ground 6' long x 18"deep and 2'6" wide. All my lecturers
> were Veterans of South Vietnam, Borneo, Malaya...and in one notable
> case, all three. The were no majors apart from "you are not here to
> die for your Flag, Country etc....You are here to make the other
> Ba......ds die for theirs. All in all, an eye opener. No Computers,
> and the only Engineers were laying explosives.
>
> Quote of Note;
> Journalist.."what do you think makes Australian Soldiers so effective
> Jungle Fighters?"
>
> Warrant Officer Instructor.."In most countries around the world, the
> Soldiers are taught that the jungle is a dark forbidding place with
> lots of things lurking in the Dark......We teach our Soldiers to go
> out and do the Lurking!!"
>
> Mist Warrior.

Mist Warrior, you sound disgustingly familiar.. do I know you IRL? Where
in AU are you? :)

* GreyWolf could add some other comments about the Aust. SAS... but he'd
have you kill you all after you'd read them *

The GrWf.
Message no. 6
From: Aaron Binns sparrow@***.net.au
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 12:05:39 +1000
> Misty, if you are trying to impress us, you've failed with at least a few.
> I've done my time. The reason why asked Strego where he goes to school is
> because I have more than a passing interest in military history, and was
> interested if it was a non-militray school. I am also looking for a place
> to continue once I've finished my current degree program, perhaps in a
> school where I could find interesting electives to give my mind a break,
> and having a gift with computers and electronics, the major is a natural one.

I didnt think he was trying to impress.. but then again i just woke up.. so I dont
appear to be thinking straight right now - yet.

> Ah, the roughneck's scorn of it's learned betters. I've done my urban,
> alpine, arctic and temperate forest/grassland courses, and could write a
> book on the fine art and science of making things go boom. I've forgetten
> more about small arms, land movement, tracking, survival in my territory
> (which does not include jungles, thank the Spirits), and unarmed combat
> than most humans think exist. You're adivsors have experince that I can
> not match, but based of your tone of type, I doubt you can match mine.
> But that is not my limit. I can, have and will contribute more to my
> society than those skills. Can you say the same?

Careful there CyberRaven. Dont show the same scorn you point out to others. Doesnt
make you any better that him. I know enough to be able to say that training methods
differ between Aussie and American troopers. Not so much between officers though (well
not TOO much).

Americans get more training with high tech gadgetry and stuff in addition to the
arctic, urban, forest, whatever training they get because they can afford the gadgets.
(Not that they always get them or the training). Aussies dont have quite so many areas
they will end up fighting in so they dont get so many areas or training right off the
bat, and we dont have the money to kit out our soldiers with high tech
much-of-anything.

Thus you see a major difference: A: between the way they think and B: between what
they are trained in.

I believe the australian army admits the americans are better than them in most areas
perticularly air superiority usage... (since they have so many different land types in
the country and so many more forces)

but I also understand the Americans say that there aint noone better than aussie
troops at desert or jungle fighting with the type of troops and the number of troops
we have. (where we will probably end up fighting if invaded - northern Australia - not
speaking of gurilla warfare with heaps of troops like some asian countries - we dont
have the numbers they do)

Its just in the specialities thats all.


> Now go back to bed, take something to counter the excess of testoserone
> you seem to be suffering from, and try not to get into pecker contests with
> people you don't know.

Careful not to view everything as an insult Cyberraven.
And Mistwarrior - he has a good point not to poke at ppl who you dont know or know
about.

Ok.. enough of my trying to say you both have good points (if not some bad ones too)
in what you said...
Im not a councellor - but I think you should respect each other for what you know...
not get uppity because you disagree.

GreyWolf

* and dont yell at me - Im just trying to put in my 2 cents *
Message no. 7
From: Mist Warrior themistwarrior@********.com.au
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 13:41:21 +1000
Forgive the laziness, but I will address both Cyber Raven and Grey
Wolf here..


> At 09.50 07-19-99 +1000, you wrote:
> >I actually did my G/Warfare courses living in the jungle, sleeping
in
>
Raven Wrote.....

> Misty, if you are trying to impress us, you've failed with at least
a few.
> I've done my time. The reason why asked Strego where he goes to
school is
> because I have more than a passing interest in military history, and
was
> interested if it was a non-militray school. I am also looking for a
place
> to continue once I've finished my current degree program, perhaps in
a
> school where I could find interesting electives to give my mind a
break,
> and having a gift with computers and electronics, the major is a
natural one.
>
> >Ba......ds die for theirs. All in all, an eye opener. No Computers,
> >and the only Engineers were laying explosives.
>
> Ah, the roughneck's scorn of it's learned betters. I've done my
urban,
> alpine, arctic and temperate forest/grassland courses, and could
write a
> book on the fine art and science of making things go boom. I've
forgetten
> more about small arms, land movement, tracking, survival in my
territory
> (which does not include jungles, thank the Spirits), and unarmed
combat
> than most humans think exist. You're adivsors have experince that I
can
> not match, but based of your tone of type, I doubt you can match
mine.
> But that is not my limit. I can, have and will contribute more to
my
> society than those skills. Can you say the same?
>
> Now go back to bed, take something to counter the excess of
testoserone
> you seem to be suffering from, and try not to get into pecker
contests with
> people you don't know.
>
>
> CyberRaven
> http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
> "Once again, we have spat int he face of Death and his second
cousin,
> Dismemberment."
> "'Impossible' is a term used by those of little imagination or
intelligence
> to describe that which they can not understand."
>
Actually, here I was actually making comments tongue in cheek...My
fault for not using emoticons. Your experience is quite impressive,
and I bow to your superior course knowledge.
My experience (thankfully) to Jungle and Desert Environs; My urban
stuff was interesting but not as comprehensive as yours would have
been, and not really my forte.
So please, Don't take what I said to be Comparing "peckers" with
people I don't know... I have had my fill of trying to stick it out
harder and longer than everyone around me. I am just a poor simple
grunt who is now plodding along in the Health Care field helping
others recover from their various conditions.
I don't know if that counts as being a positive contribution to
society, but I do my best to help :-))

And in answer to Greywolf...I am not sure that we would know each
other but anyone who has experienced Tully in all its glory would
sound familiar, don't you agree? I am in NSW and retired. And
following a different path. As for the Education on SAS...no thanks. I
have no need to go there :-))

Mist Warrior.
themistwarrior@********.com.au
Message no. 8
From: David Hinkley dhinkley@***.org
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 23:08:43 -0700
Date sent: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 18:27:02 +0100
To: shadowRN@*********.org
From: "Paul J. Adam" <Paul@********.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Send reply to: shadowrn@*********.org

[SNIP]
> "True democracy" would have seen Ho Chi Minh elected in 1956.

Nope..."True Democracy" would have had Ho Chi Minh admited to the
Versailles Peace Negotiations in 1918. He showed up as a representive of
the Vietnamese people. In response to Wilson's self determination
statements. Insted he was welcomed by the Communists who were holding
on of the Internationals at the same time.

[SNIP]
>
> > I put loss in quotes because the US military DIDN'T lost the Vietnam
> >conflict. They did what they were supposed to do: keep the South Vietnamese
> >afloat and "free and democratic".
>
> Only if bouncing from coup to coup is "democracy".
>
> >At the signing of the Peace Accords (whatever
> >they were) the US said that if the North attacked the South, it would attack the
> >North again. The North started the fighting again, the politicians did nothing.
> >The South fought valiantly, but was overwhelmed.

By the invasion by a conventional Armored force.




David Hinkley
dhinkley@***.org
******************************************************
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve niether liberty or
safety.
Ben Franklin
Message no. 9
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...)
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 22:23:34 -0400
David Hinkley wrote:
<SNIP>
By the invasion by a conventional Armored force.

Well yes, but by the end of the conflict concerning the Americans it was a slow
invasion
by North Vietnamese forces anyway. From Dr. Joes' book "Modern Guerilla
Insurgency" pge 146 I
quote "If the troops who had infiltrated South Viet Nam from the North in small
numbers
between 1958 and 1965 had all come in at the same time, it would have looked like a
Korean-style invasion. Instead, the [Ho Chi Minh] Trail confronted American and ARVN
troops
with a sort of slow-motion Schlieffen Plan, by which they were constantly being
outflanked."
The Viet Cong were effectively removed by the mis-judged and critically stupid Tet
Offensive. Of 84,000 Viet Cong involved in Tet, almost 30,000 were KILLED!!!!! After that
time, Viet Nam was a conflict between North and South, with the US aiding an ally.
--
--Strago

The gene pool in the 21st century needs a deep cleaning. I am the chlorine.

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2++ !SR3 h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN++ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++ d+) gm+ M-

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [OT] Vietnam lesson (kinda long) (Was Re: Values and so on...), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!