DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**cenRealliat** · 04-08-2010, 04:01 PM

[/B]

It's my understanding that after Japan invaded Indochina in WWII and the French colonial government in Vietnam fled back to France, that General Eisenhower promised Ho Chi Minh that if he fought the Japanese, the US wouild not allow the return of French colonial rule after the war. Ho Chi Minh's forces beat back the Japanese, but allegedly because Eisenhower, as President, needed the French to back NATO, he ignored his agreement with Ho and allowed the French return. Then, after the Vietnamese defeated the French with communist support from Russia and China, the US took over the war in place of the French.

If I believed in big government statism at all, I would agree with George Washington's advice in his Farewell Address for the US to avoid "entangling alliances" and mind its own business. It was the overthrow of the democratically elected Mohammed Mossedegh in Iran by the CIA and MI6 in 1953 and the installation of the Shah in Iran, among other things, that have created Arab skepticism about US intentions in the MId-East. 1953 Iranian coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A bit of revisionist history there. Yes the Ho did beat the French in North Vietnam but the South remained under their control. While we had "advisers" a couple of hundred only in the South to help with the Viet Cong, serious involvement began duing the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. The overthrow of Mohammed Mossedegh was helped by the US but for reasons than just Oil. Those reasons included sympathetic responses to USSR and early NAZI ties. That being said, US Oil interests did play a role. While I don't believe we should have gotten involved in Vietnam, I don't have a real issue with our involvement in Iran which amounted to material/intelligence help. We were given decades of a close Intell field on our Number One enemy at the time and it did not involve the US military. Yes this isn't fair but that is the world we live in.

04-08-2010, 04:01 PM	#34
cenRealliat Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 520 Senior Member	[/B] It's my understanding that after Japan invaded Indochina in WWII and the French colonial government in Vietnam fled back to France, that General Eisenhower promised Ho Chi Minh that if he fought the Japanese, the US wouild not allow the return of French colonial rule after the war. Ho Chi Minh's forces beat back the Japanese, but allegedly because Eisenhower, as President, needed the French to back NATO, he ignored his agreement with Ho and allowed the French return. Then, after the Vietnamese defeated the French with communist support from Russia and China, the US took over the war in place of the French. If I believed in big government statism at all, I would agree with George Washington's advice in his Farewell Address for the US to avoid "entangling alliances" and mind its own business. It was the overthrow of the democratically elected Mohammed Mossedegh in Iran by the CIA and MI6 in 1953 and the installation of the Shah in Iran, among other things, that have created Arab skepticism about US intentions in the MId-East. 1953 Iranian coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A bit of revisionist history there. Yes the Ho did beat the French in North Vietnam but the South remained under their control. While we had "advisers" a couple of hundred only in the South to help with the Viet Cong, serious involvement began duing the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. The overthrow of Mohammed Mossedegh was helped by the US but for reasons than just Oil. Those reasons included sympathetic responses to USSR and early NAZI ties. That being said, US Oil interests did play a role. While I don't believe we should have gotten involved in Vietnam, I don't have a real issue with our involvement in Iran which amounted to material/intelligence help. We were given decades of a close Intell field on our Number One enemy at the time and it did not involve the US military. Yes this isn't fair but that is the world we live in.
	Quote