From: Terry W. Colvin (fortean1@mindspring.com)
Date: Sat Jan 18 2003 - 16:28:04 MST
Charles Heckman wrote:
> The responses made to the comments on America’s role in Vietnam from the
> Scandinavian letter writer are mainly correct. However, I think some
> statements I read should be re-examined.
Charles,
Excellent dissertation! You and I are in 100% agreement as far as I can see. I
grow weary of hearing the old tune that America's role in the Vietnam War was
purely for money. To accept that premise is to play into the hands of the
leftist radicals, who would cast our war as an evil war and those of us who
served in it as "dupes" or worse. It is true enough, many did make money from
the war. Could it have been otherwise? We are, after all, a Capitalist
society. And it may well be true that the Johnson's and others in positions of
leadership owned stock in companies which may have profited from the
continuation of the war. That does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that
profit was the sole reason LBJ was so anxious to commit ground combat troops
there, unless someone is blessed with psychic powers. Effect is not always
indicative of cause, is it?
I don't want to give too much credit to LBJ here, as I have very large bones to
pick with the way he and Mc Namara managed the war. But I still believe our
role there was truly an attempt to stop the steamroller of World Communism.
Granted, the US role was badly mismanaged. From a strategic standpoint, it was
almost totally inept! But I still contend the motivation for our involvement
was NOT for profit. Yes, profit was undeniably a primary effect of our
participation in the war for some US corporations, but such is the case in ANY
war, is it not? I don't hear much criticism of US corporate profits that
resulted from World War II or the Korean War.
["Obviously, without the massive support of the
communist bloc, there could have been no Vietnam War."]
As for the Soviet and Chinese involvement in supporting the North Vietnamese,
what you have stated is absolutely true. I am in a position to know this first
hand, especially with regard to the Chinese involvement. Their support of the
North Vietnamese in the form of arms and troops was nothing less than massive.
As a Mandarin interpreter, I listened in on and translated air to ground /
ground to air radio transmissions between the Chinese IL-18 "Beagle" transports
and their air nav ground stations. The transport flights originating in Bei
Jing, Shanghai, and other major Chinese cities, and terminating in Hanoi took
place EVERY DAY of my duty assignments in the Far East, which ran between
October of '66 and October '68. (Onna Point, Okinawa and Ramasun Station,
Thailand) I can assure you, those transport cargo bays were NOT empty when they
landed in Hanoi! I have no reason to believe that Chinese support of North
Vietnam ceased when I returned Stateside. The continued support of the North by
the Chinese and Soviets, after the US pulled its support out of the South is
absolutely what led to the fall of the Republic of Vietnam. Domino fashion,
Cambodia and Laos followed shortly thereafter. (Yes, the "Domino Theory" was
proven correct, though there still are some who will argue otherwise.)
No offense to those who believe otherwise. Just another of my "two cents"...
In brotherhood,
--
Bob Wheatley
Sgt. E-4, USAF Security Service
Det 4, 6922 Security Wing, Ramasun Station / Udorn
Shift Supervisor & Mandarin Voice Intercept Operator
Dec, 1967 - Oct, 1968
--
Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@mindspring.com >
Alternate: < fortean1@msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 17:10:21 MST