-Dead-, sorry but nothing is perfect in this world. I consider this improvement and progress. Every Country has a bit of shadiness in its history and nothing good happens overnight. Considering that the KMT were the lesser of two evils emerging from a by gone era of oligarchy, then fought WWII against the invading Japanese, then against the local Chinese communist party, losing and fleeing to Formosa (Taiwan), I dont officially agree with all of their decisions made however I understand to a certain extent. So does the US Govt and their policies up to today as they are considered friendlies in that region.
Well I always thought "a symbol of freedom and a better way for a region that is unwilling to change due to its corrupt leaders." meant it was fairly perfect, rather than (for the majority of it's history) a corrupt dictatorship - which would seem to be the opposite. You know, that's kinda why it's a symbol of freedom... because it's so free. But fine as long as you downgraded the epithet of "a symbol of freedom" to "the lesser of two evils" we're back out of mirth mode. Irony levels are much lower too.
I consider this just the price of freedome for that nation as all nations have had to pay their own dues. Even the US with its Revolutionary war and Civil wars...
Ahhhh... now a picture forms. Only Communist dictatorships have massacres and brutal suppression of political opponents. Right wing dictatorships are merely "getting people to pay the price of freedom" or doing a bit of "shadiness"(hmm ask Chen Shui Bian why his wife is in a wheelchair - I don't think he's gonna say it's just down to a spot of "shadiness"). Communist dictatorships are "evil", Right wing dictatorships we support are merely "not perfect" or "the lesser of two evils". I also like the way only the KMT fought the Japanese. New one on me, and most sinologists.
No the US does not have borders with these two countries however after world war II, emerging from that as the predominate world superpower vs the USSR, the issue of important borders and securities had become grossly vague and even more so today as the world is now high tech. The borders today are at the airport security check points and the battlefields are between 30 thousand feet over New York or another city and the side of a sky scraper. These battlefields the US is not fully capable of winning, thus the campaign in Afganistan. Everything else in between is gray now.
OK - so whereas Communists "meddle" to further their own agenda, the US "looks to protect important borders" for the world as a whole!? Despite those borders not really existing and the country being thousands of miles away.
My opinion, they would rather have a split neighbor than a longshot unified communist neighbor. After Korea, they figured that the Communist party in Vietnam could not pull off a victory against the US in terms of general political outcome post war. My question is where did all of the fancy weapons come from. Where were the mig pilots and SAM operators trained. How were they funded through this war for so long against the US. After all this document comes from a public peoples library in a communist country. Thats what they want everyone to believe. I cant comment on what really happened however my opinion is that, of course they were involed in some way. They had their own changing interests and in general its called meddling.
And MAAG and MAAGV and that Tonkin Gulf incident and those Ground troops and bombing campaigns - that was "assistance" not "meddling" because....? Are you telling me that in the event of Russians aiding the people of Southern Mexico with ground troops the US would ignore the threat altogether and refuse to sell them planes, train pilots and SAM operators because that would be meddling? That'll be why the US owes China a few black eyes for their meddling, we presume...
Indeed - what the heck were all those US "advisors" doing in Vietnam during the 50s and 60s? Holidays was it? Working on their tans? Or training South Vietnamese troops? You decide.
And if the Chinese reckoned the Vietnamese wouldn't win, why didn't they send more aid later on?
As to the document being what they want you to hear - ahem - well you may not be aware of this, but the Vietnamese and the Chinese are not best buddies no more (if indeed they ever were
best buddies) - they'd just seriously fallen out (fisticuffs) when the document was written. It's in a library in Vietnam, so rest assured, it's not going to be telling you what the Chinese want you to hear.
Here's another bit from the preamble of the Le Duan doc:
After the Chinese engineer troops and anti-aircraft artillery units had arrived, however, tension soon emerged between the two sides, and after Premier Alexei Kosygin committed the Soviet Union to substantially aiding Vietnam during a visit to Hanoi in February 1965, Vietnam assumed a more independent posture. The tone in the 77 Conversations turns more sour from that time onwards. What Le Duan says about the late 1960s and the 1970s is more in line with what Chinese sources tell. By 1969, Le Duan claims to have summoned the military cadres to warn them that China had joined hands with the US imperialists, and that they had to study this problem, i.e., prepare themselves for future conflicts with China. Concerning Beijing's new line towards the US, Le Duan makes the same accusation as the Vietnamese White Book: "During that time, China made the announcement [to the US]: `If you don't attack me, I won't attack you.' Thus they left the US with greater leverage in Vietnam." This, of course, makes sense. China really did emphasize its own great power interests to the detriment of North Vietnam.
Oh yeah, those meddling evil warmongering Chinese! Reckon the US would be as easy-going about commies in their backyard? Sure, just look at US-Cuba relations... mmmm warm and fuzzy.
