Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Iraq and VietNam: Are The Wars Really So Different?

The Iraq War is a quagmire, the Left has been telling us the past four years; Iraq is VietNam Part II, they say. The Right has been saying there is little or no similarities between VietNam and Iraq. Perhaps there is more similarity in the two conflicts than even the Left believes.

In April 2000, J.R. Nyquist, expert in geopolitics and international relations, author of "Origins of the Fourth World War", wrote the following piece for World Net Daily on the anniversary of the end of the VietNam War. Much of what he wrote more than a year before the four attacks upon the United States on September 11, 2001 will be very familiar to anyone who has paid any attention to the current state of the world's conflicts.

Indochina 25 years later

This month marks the 25th anniversary of the communist victory in Vietnam. To this day most Americans do not know why our side lost and the communists won. More significantly, few really care. Most Americans also do not know that one of the chief goals of communism is the liquidation of the middle class, which communists refer to as "the bourgeoisie." In addition, the communists seek to eliminate property rights worldwide and to smash the planet's leading constitutional governments -- especially the United States government. The takeover of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia were steps toward this overall goal.

Contrary to what many people think, U.S. forces and the army of the Republic of Vietnam successfully repulsed two major communist offensives in Southeast Asia -- the first one in 1968 and a second one in 1972. The first of these, the infamous Tet offensive, was a disastrous defeat for the communists. The second of these, launched in the spring of 1972, was also a defeat for the communists.

The communists had begun the war using light weapons and guerrilla tactics. In 1972 this changed. The Russians weighed in with shiploads of tanks and heavy weapons, so that the North Vietnamese army (NVA) could initiate large-scale conventional attacks. In 1971 alone, the Russians sent 350 cargo ships loaded with over a million tons of supplies. Shipments included Russian T-34 tanks and long-range 130 mm. guns.

But still, all these supplies were worthless against the power of America. The U.S. had better weapons and was determined to support the army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). So the Soviet General Staff had a plan. This plan was to pour even greater resources into the United States itself.

To understand what really happened we should consider the statements of Col. Stanislav Lunev, a high-ranking Russian defector to the United States. Lunev worked for the GRU, which is the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Soviet (now Russian) General Staff. According to Lunev, the GRU believed itself responsible for North Vietnam's final victory. In Lunev's book, "Through the Eyes of the Enemy," he says that his GRU instructors and superiors would not directly claim credit, but "they strongly implied that the GRU was responsible for the Vietnamese success."

How was this success supposedly achieved?

According to Lunev, the GRU and KGB "helped to fund just about every antiwar movement and organization in America and abroad." This funding, said Lunev, was provided "via undercover operatives or front organizations." More amazing still, Lunev claims that the GRU and KGB "had a larger budget for antiwar propaganda in the United States than it did for economic and military support of the Vietnamese."

In other words, Russia's antiwar propaganda campaign against the American effort in Vietnam had cost the Kremlin over $1 billion. And look how well it worked. As Lunev recounts in his book, "it was a hugely successful campaign and well worth the cost. The antiwar sentiment created an incredible momentum that greatly weakened the U.S. military."

In other words, U.S. military victories were negated by communist propaganda victories in the United States. While the communists were being slaughtered in futile offensive attacks against Vietnam, the American people were being systematically convinced that the war was hopeless. Allied victories were overshadowed by intensive GRU-KGB propaganda. In fact, the United States was almost destabilized by Russian propaganda. Not only were there antiwar protests that paralyzed campuses and disrupted the Democratic Party's national convention in Chicago, but following the assassination of Martin Luther King on April 4, 1968, federal troops had to be deployed in Washington, Chicago and Baltimore to restore order. There were major disturbances in 125 American cities.

Things were so bad the FBI was asked to gather domestic intelligence on various domestic troublemakers. But the FBI refused. Then the Justice Department asked the United States Army to perform a domestic intelligence function. As Gen. Bruce Palmer, then Army vice chief of staff, later wrote: "a large amount of information on various American nationals had been accumulated and placed in military intelligence computers, and some undercover intelligence operations had been conducted which were probably illegal."

When the civil libertarians found out, the Army got a black eye. All the information the Army gathered was destroyed while the civilian politicians refused to take responsibility. Therefore, the subversives in this country, financed by the Soviet General Staff, operated with impunity -- protected by the United States Constitution, which they had vowed to bring down. The American experience of 1968 shows that under the right circumstances a foreign general staff can bring chaos to the streets of America.

Consider the testimony of these two military men:

"While in Vietnam," wrote General Palmer, "I had not fully appreciated the seriousness of the dissent back home. ..."

"The GRU and the KGB, " wrote Colonel Lunev, "helped to fund just about every antiwar movement and organization in America and abroad."

Here is the historical lesson: The American people were hoodwinked by communist propaganda. They were hoodwinked into believing that victory was defeat. And they were hoodwinked into believing that the Vietnamese communists [today Arab and Islamic terrorists] were patriots defending their country against American imperialism.

The Indochinese Communist Party was violent and murderous from the start. It was founded in 1930. In 1931 the party created rural "Soviets" and began by murdering local landowners and stealing property. While still under Japanese occupation in early 1945, the 5,000-strong Indochinese Communist Party launched a terror campaign -- not against the Japanese but against political rivals in the nationalist movement.

When Ho Chi Minh became a major power after the Japanese surrender, he ruthlessly liquidated his political opponents. In August 1945 the Viet Minh press called for "traitor elimination committees" in every village. They weren't simply eliminating those who collaborated with the Japanese. One of their interests was to eliminate communists who deviated from the party line.

When French rule in Vietnam ended the communist atrocities accelerated. According to "The Black Book of Communism," which documents communism's most horrendous crimes: "The scale of the violence (in Vietnam) was extraordinary."

The communist slogan at the time was:
"Better ten innocent deaths [martyrs] than one enemy survivor [infidel survivor]." There were an estimated 50,000 executions in the North Vietnamese countryside. As many as 100,000 were imprisoned for being anti-communist. Masses of refugees poured into the south, fleeing from the communist tyranny.

This was the enemy we were fighting. This is what we were protecting Southeast Asia from.

Inwardly confused, weak and uninformed about the evils we were opposing, the American people acknowledged the guilt of their own armed forces, the vileness of their own national leaders, and left Indochina to the communists [the Middle East, Europe, and Africa to the Islamic fundamentalists]. It was a genuine case of false consciousness. People's emotions had been manipulated. The country felt sick in its gut.

And so the communists won. The killing camps of the North were not closed until 1986. Hundreds of thousands fled in boats to escape. Many drowned or were murdered by pirates. In Cambodia the communists abolished all money and all private property. Everyone was ordered to wear peasant work-clothes. In other words, the entire urban population was forced into the countryside. Pol Pot, the communist dictator of Cambodia at that time, said that only a few thousand Cambodians died in this process.

But that was not true. According to Pen Sovan, one-time general secretary of the People's Revolutionary Party of Kampuchea, Pol Pot had killed 3.1 million Cambodians. A CIA study later calculated that 3.8 million died in Cambodia from 1975-1979. Reseacher Marek Sliwinski was more modest in his calculation, putting the figure at over 2 million. He concluded that approximately 33.9 percent of Cambodia's male population and 15.7 percent of the female population died in the initial period of communist rule.

The GRU and KGB-financed antiwar protestors can believe what they want. But their action undid America's battlefield victories and led to a slaughter that far exceeded anything seen in the actual war. The Paris peace agreement that was signed in early 1973 was a sham. The communists violated it before the ink was dry. In Richard Palmer's book, "Summons of the Trumpet," it says that the Soviet Union and China poured military supplies into North Vietnam after 1973 "while the United States gradually constricted its own flow of supplies to Saigon."
[As will happen again in Iraq under Democrat leadership and their retreat timetables.]

This constriction of supplies was effected by the antiwar lobby in America, which influenced the United States Congress to cut support to the Republic of Vietnam. There was no reason to restrict the flow of supplies to our ally. Those supplies represented a very small cost to us, and no Americans were then involved in the fighting. The Vietnamese people were defending themselves. All they needed was fuel, spare parts and ammunition. More than that, it was what we had promised them. But the antiwar movement did not care that the communists broke the peace. They did not care that the communists were the aggressors. [Again today, the antiwar move does not care about the people forced live under absolute despotism, despite all their pre-war protestations about those conditions and cries for Washington to do something.]

The people that made up the antiwar movement are still with us today. And this month we should take a moment to remember that President Clinton was himself an antiwar activist and organizer. [As was Hillary Clinton, currently running for the office of President of the United States of America and John Kerry who ran for that office in 2004.]

The people the GRU and KGB were financing in this country did not go away. And their 1975 victory was only the first of many.
[Wahabi Saudi Arabia is financing 80% of the Islamic Centers and Mosques in America, eventually obtaining their funds from the sale of oil to Americans. We are financing the war against us and paying for our own funeral.]

Posted: April 6, 2000
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By J.R. Nyquist

© 2000

To say that Iraq is VietNam is not strictly true, but there are many similarities when the battlefields of guns and bombs are left behind. What happened behind the curtain then and now has too much in common to ignore. History doesn't repeat so much as rhymes. And a bad rhyme at that.

The words appearing in brackets, [*] and black, are my own additions to the text and may not reflect the opinions of J.R. Nyquist. Bolded passages are my emphasis.

The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.


Gayle said...

This is all absolutely true, Indigo Red. The only thing that really surprises me is the statement "To this day most Americans do not know why our side lost and the communists won." Sheesh! I suppose it's true, but it's unbelievable! The tragedy of this is that too many people don't ever learn from history, or even pay attention to history.

I have to admit to speed reading this because it's so long and I'm short of time. I believe I caught most of it, but I've copied it to my documents for slower reading later. Thanks!

RoseCovered Glasses said...

I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak.

Politicians make no difference.

We have bought into the Military Industrial Complex (MIC). If you would like to read how this happens please see:


Through a combination of public apathy and threats by the MIC we have let the SYSTEM get too large. It is now a SYSTEMIC problem and the SYSTEM is out of control. Government and industry are merging and that is very dangerous.

There is no conspiracy. The SYSTEM has gotten so big that those who make it up and run it day to day in industry and government simply are perpetuating their existance.

The politicians rely on them for details and recommendations because they cannot possibly grasp the nuances of the environment and the BIG SYSTEM.

So, the system has to go bust and then be re-scaled, fixed and re-designed to run efficiently and prudently, just like any other big machine that runs poorly or becomes obsolete or dangerous.

This situation will right itself through trauma. I see a government ENRON on the horizon, with an associated house cleaning.

The next president will come and go along with his appointees and politicos. The event to watch is the collapse of the MIC.

For more details see:


Gayle said...

Interesting. I'm going to check out Rose Covered Glasses links.

jack rensimer said...

Wow, I don't want to believe it, as many of us don't, but seems to have truth here.

You can see T.E. Lawrence's 'Seven Pillars Of Wisdom' and see similar guerrilla/insurgency tactics being used in both wars.

Mike's America said...

Oh my...military industrial complex?

Black Helicopter time!

Indigo: The old Communist gang is still getting their money's worth with anti-war propaganda directed at neutering the U.S. military and weakening the U.S.

So that parallel with Vietnam is true.

However, after we left Vietnam, the North Vietnamese didn't follow us here. Lots of South Vietnamese did and they are now good and honorable citizens of this country.

The Islamists will follow us from Iraq if we quit and they won't come here to open laundries.

Indigo Red said...

Mike, it was exactly the parallel you agree is true that I was highlighting. There has always been close co-operation between government and industry because our government does not perform those tasks directly as many others do.

Remember, just because a person is paranoid doesn't mean somebody isn't out to get them. And a "black helicopter" doesn't have to be black. The black box on airplanes is actually orange and "green cards" are not green.

Anonymous said...

there is a big similarity...
irak and vietnam are not situated in the u.s territory...gros con!!!