Hmmm I think you're missing the mark of the this thread and my comments, or you need a review on social communication.
I gave a hypothetical sarcastic statement about, could anybody imagine a NVA committing acts of treason.
And you thought I was supporting that idea, and are now arguing with me, when we both actually agree! But you have some points here I need to clarify.
There was "a lot" of marketable material in the south. You've heard of the underground tunnels? some of which extended 120 miles in length, the NLF had huge amounts of rice, weapons, medical, and don't forget tons of stolen US goods that would be very profitable.
..Aaaand of course they would have nobody to sell it to in the North, because it's a highly nationalistic Buddhist society! This is where you're confused about my sarcasm.
But the NLF could always defect in numbers and profit with the corrupt ARVN, but they didn't.
Ok I will address the North's "secret police" and "prison camps" ..Sure they had strict authorities, but I never said they didn't! you just didn't get my sarcasm.
Ok, you say they've been corrupt since the seventies? ...They've been dumb in expanding the economy! Because they don't want to invest their budget back into the country, but this doesn't mean their corrupt, they just don't help the people when they should.
But the people still don't turn tail, and steal from the govt. the way the ARVN did. I hope this clarifies my original points on how the VN war was lost.
How old are you? and which country are you from?
reply
share
R011DaveAAA
11 years ago
There was "a lot" of marketable material in the south.
Have it your way. The Communists were such Paladins that it never occurred to them to sell off their supplies - the rather basic ones they needed just to stay alive. Not to mention that they weren't at all concerned that the penalty for such sales was death.
That, by the way, was actual sarcasm.
and of course they would have nobody to sell it to in the North, because it's a highly nationalistic Buddhist society!
Is this more sarcasm? They were a Communist police state with acute shortages and , as I've noted highly vigilant and ruthless security services. No one in the North had the money to buy stolen goods anyway as the Party made sure there wasn't any.
but this doesn't mean their corrupt
No. The fact they take bribes means they're corrupt.
How old are you? and which country are you from?
Why do you want to know?
reply
share
Badlands1
11 years ago
Oh boy this is getting ridiculous! All from your initial confusion about my first comment.
Listen, I made reference to the fact the ARVN and USA lost the war was due to fact of the vast differences in corruption and religion in the South and North, after the French lost; the Geneva Convention split the country in two, something the North nationalists could never accept, if the South were truly Buddhist Nations, and not corrupt Catholics they wouldn't have been a civil war and they would have reunited.
Taking bribes is very different than treason, that bribe money is still going to the communist party rather than coming out of their pocket, which we BOTH would agree would mean death or prison.
I'm 30yrs old, Caucasian from Canada, you just seem VERY different, and a lil' odd from most history buffs I have conversations with.
reply
share
R011DaveAAA
11 years ago
if the South were truly Buddhist Nations, and not corrupt Catholics
First off, your remark about Catholics being corrupt is religious bigotry.
Second, The South, while it had a few more Catholics than the North, was overwhelmingly Buddhist - about eighty percent Buddhist, in fact, with the other twenty percent split between the Catholics and other faiths. The North claimed to be almost entirely Atheist and persecuted those who openly practiced Buddhism - or any faith for that matter.
the North nationalists could never accept
More important, it wasn't something the Vietnamese Communists who had taken power in the North could accept. They would not accept any government which they did not control completely. It was because people in the part of the country not controlled by the Communists knew this, as did the United States, that the South refused to join the North. Note that having taken power in the North, the Communists did nothing to indicate they were willing to share power with anyone else. Indeed, one of the first things they did was to round up political opponents and murder them.
that bribe money is still going to the communist party
No more than RVN officials who took bribes and diverted government property were doing so for the RVN government. When governments want money, they just levy taxes. Bribes by definition are not the same thing.
reply
share
Badlands1
11 years ago
The Diem regime was Catholic and had JFK's initial support, the other peasant Buddhists in the South aren't part of that political situation.
It's funny the way you're trying so hard to disect my statements when we actually agree at heart if you'd get what I'm trying to get across.
Yes the RVN govt took bribes and diverted material, the North never did that. And those ARVN officers taking bribes would pocket the money! Communism every goes back into the govt. You first brought up bribes, I don't think it relates to our corruption topic.
I've noticed you're a professional political malcontent here on IMDB, and also don't want to disclose you're age, ethnicity, or location, so until then best of luck online!
reply
share
R011DaveAAA
11 years ago
The Diem regime was Catholic
The Diem regime only lasted until 1963, was not entirely Catholics, and Diem and his immediate clique were not the only power centre in the South.
the other peasant Buddhists in the South
In fact, Buddhists were the majority amongst the Southern middle and upper classes, and many peasants were Catholic.
Communism every goes back into the govt.
That certainly isn't the case in practice.
I've noticed you're a professional political malcontent here on IMDB
I am? Then where's my check?
and also don't want to disclose you're age, ethnicity, or location
Sorry I don't wan to cooperate in your attempt to turn this into an ad hominem argument. If you can give me an actual reason why that information is relevant to this discussion, I;d be glads to give it, as I have elsewhere.
reply
share
Badlands1
11 years ago
Diem regime were responsible mainly for appealing to get the US's help. At least on paper, the US mainly wanted to get their economy moving through war effort again, and partly why JFK was killed, because he did plan to pull out.
Ohh so now many peasants WERE Catholic, you've contradicted yourself.
I think you have Communism confused with Capitalism, there is NO autonomy in Communism.
Just take a gander at all you thread history, yikes! IMDB is a site for movie fans not political debates.
Upbringing and maturity have a lot to do with debating. That's why.
reply
share
R011DaveAAA
11 years ago
At least on paper, the US mainly wanted to get their economy moving through war effort again,
And that's tell us more about your politics than American foreign policy in the 1950's and 1960's. American opposition to Soviet aligned aggression had nothing to do with wanting war. As for the economy, they didn't need to "get it moving" as it was doing quite well during his time. GDP was growing quite steadily before major US involvement in Vietnam.
and partly why JFK was killed,
JFK was killed because a Communist loser and failed defector had the idea that killing the President of the United States would somehow be a good idea.
because he did plan to pull out.
Something for which there is no evidence. On the other hand, he did escalate the American presence in Vietnam and would likely have escalated more.
Ohh so now many peasants WERE Catholic, you've contradicted yourself.
How?
there is NO autonomy in Communism.
Yet somehow Communist officials just about everywhere take bribes which they do not forward to their government.
reply
share
Badlands1
11 years ago
Oh boy... Ok so Oswald was only responsible for killing JFK?
There's lot's of evidence he was going to pull out and only aid the RVN govt.
A few comments back you said there was barely any Catholics in the South; %20!
What about all the secret police, execution squads, and prisons you were referring too to stop the Communist officials from taking bribes?
Do you think 9/11 was an inside job?
reply
share
R011DaveAAA
11 years ago
Oh boy... Ok so Oswald was only responsible for killing JFK?
I think you meant to say that only Oswald was responsible for JKF's murder. The answer to that is yes.
There's lot's of evidence he was going to pull out and only aid the RVN govt.
No, there isn't. There is lots of much later speculation by Kennedy partisans who who did not want him associated with the disaster the war became or who themselves were opposed to the war. In fact, there isn't much evidence as to exactly what he was planning beyond the fact that he had already escalated US involvement including approving to coup against Diem.
A few comments back you said there was barely any Catholics in the South; %20!
Yes, I said about 20% of Southerners were Catholic and that many peasants were Catholic. That's not contradictory unless you think "many" means more than twenty percent or some other arbitrary number.
What about all the secret police,
Once they took the South, they not only lost focus, but found a lot more to be bribed with.
Do you think 9/11 was an inside job?
No. Do you? I wouldn't be surprised. You apparently alreay believe one bit of idiocy, so believing more wouldn't be unusual.
reply
share
Badlands1
11 years ago
Well my friend I'm glad you are intelligent enough to know that 9/11 was NOT an inside job, I was testing you a bit there.
But until to tell me your age, and nationality I'm not going to respond anymore, we are basically on the same page, but are dissecting each other on simple irrelevant things, when we essentially agree, and since you have more internet "troll" (as the kids say) experience, I'm out of my league.
If you are a huge military buff, you need to adopt a different more social positive attitude to get along with people, especially if you were in a barracks. Copying and pasting peoples comments, and dissecting them, will only lead to negativity and isolation.
reply
share