[Peace-discuss] Obama et al. lie about Vietnam

[C. G. Estabrook]

[Barack Obama wrote in The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming  
the American Dream (2006) that “the greatest casualty of that  
[Vietnam] war was the bond of trust between the American people and  
their government.” Paul Street, who quotes the remark, comments, “as  
if the deaths of millions of Indochinese and 58,000 U.S. GIs were  
secondary and as if popular American skepticism towards the designs of  
the U.S. foreign policy establishment isn’t a sign of democratic  
health.” It's now clear that Obama's method to restore that trust is  
to lie, as he did by representing himself as the "peace candidate" in  
2008 -  so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elected members of  
the Nobel Peace Prize Committee... --CGE]

REVERSING THE VIETNAM WAR VERDICT
By Jack A. Smith, editor, Activist Newsletter

The Pentagon has just launched a multi-year national public relations  
campaign to justify, glorify and honor Washington's catastrophic,  
aggressive and losing war against Vietnam — America's most  
controversial and unpopular military conflict.

President Barack Obama opened the militarist event, which was  
overwhelmingly approved by Congress four years ago, during a speech at  
the Vietnam Wall on Memorial Day, May 28. The entire campaign, which  
will consist of tens of thousands of events over the next 13 years, is  
ostensibly intended to "finally honor" the U.S. troops who fought in  
Vietnam. The last troops were evacuated nearly 40 years ago.

In reality, the unprecedented project — titled the Vietnam War  
Commemoration —  will utilize the "pro-veteran" extravaganza to  
accomplish two additional and more long lasting goals:

• The first is to legitimize and intensify a renewed warrior spirit  
within America as the Pentagon emerges from two counter-productive,  
ruinously expensive and stalemated unjust wars in Iraq and  
Afghanistan, and prepares for further military adventures in Asia, the  
Middle East and Africa. Within days of Obama's speech, for instance,  
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta announced a big increase of U.S.  
Navy forces in the Pacific, a move obviously targeting China. At the  
same time the Obama Administration's drone wars are accelerating as  
the Oval Office's kill list expands, and the president engages in  
cyber sabotage against Iran.

• The second is to dilute the memory of historic public opposition to  
the Vietnam war by putting forward the Pentagon's censored account of  
the conflict in public meetings, parades and educational sessions set  
to take place across the nation through 2025. These flag-waving, hyper- 
patriotic occasions will feature veterans, active duty military  
members, government officials, local politicians, teachers and  
business leaders who will combine forces to praise those who fought in  
Vietnam and those on the home front who supported the war. There won't  
be much — if  any — attention focused on the majority of Americans who  
opposed this imperialist adventure, except as a footnote describing  
how tolerant U.S. democracy is toward dissent.

The principal theme of the president's address was that American  
troops have not received sufficient laurels for their efforts to  
violently prevent the reunification of North and South Vietnam. He did  
not point out that there would have been no war had the United States  
permitted nationwide free elections to take place in Vietnam in 1956  
as specified by the 1954 Geneva Agreement ending the French  
colonialism in Indochina. Washington recently decided that the war  
"officially" began in 1962 (although U.S. involvement dates back to  
the 1950s), allowing the commemoration to begin during the "50th  
anniversary" year.

President Obama told the large, cheering crowd of veterans and their  
families at the Vietnam Wall exactly what they — and all those who  
still resented the era's large antiwar movement — wanted to hear: "One  
of the most painful chapters in our history was Vietnam —  most  
particularly, how we treated our troops who served there....

"You were often blamed for a war you didn't start, when you should  
have been commended for serving your country with valor. (Applause.)  
You were sometimes blamed for misdeeds of a few, when the honorable  
service of the many should have been praised. You came home and  
sometimes were denigrated, when you should have been celebrated. It  
was a national shame, a disgrace that should have never happened.  And  
that's why here today we resolve that it will not happen again.  
(Applause.)....

"[Y]ou wrote one of the most extraordinary stories of bravery and  
integrity in the annals of military history. (Applause.).... [E]ven  
though some Americans turned their back on you — you never turned your  
back on America.... And let's remember all those Vietnam veterans who  
came back and served again — in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You  
did not stop serving. (Applause.)

"So here today, it must be said — you have earned your place among the  
greatest generations. At this time, I would ask all our Vietnam  
veterans, those of you who can stand, to please stand, all those  
already standing, raise your hands — as we say those simple words  
which always greet our troops when they come home from here on out:  
Welcome home. (Applause.) Welcome home. Welcome home. Welcome home.  
Thank you. We appreciate you. Welcome home. (Applause.)....

"May God bless you. May God bless your families. May God bless our men  
and women in uniform. And may God bless these United States of America."

There was virtually no criticism in the corporate mass media about the  
president's gross exaggerations concerning the "mistreatment" of  
Vietnam era veterans. True, there were no victory parades, but that  
was because the U.S. Armed Forces were defeated by a much smaller and  
enormously outgunned adversary — the guerrilla forces of the South  
Vietnamese National Liberation Front (NLF) and regular forces from  
North Vietnam.

By the time many vets returned home the American people had turned  
against the war and wanted it over, as did a significant portion of  
active duty troops, including the many who identified with the peace  
movement or who mutinied or deserted. Undoubtedly some veterans were  
disrespected — but to a far lesser extent than Obama and pro-war  
forces have suggested over the years.

Whenever the U.S. conducts unpopular invasions, as in Vietnam,  
Afghanistan and Iraq, Washington and the mass media invariably insist  
that it is the duty of patriotic citizens to "support the troops" even  
if they oppose the war. But to manifest the kind of support the  
government seeks inevitably implies support for the war. This is why  
the peace groups came up with the slogan "Support the Troops — Bring  
'em home NOW!"

According to the Pentagon, which is in charge of staging the Vietnam  
War Commemoration, the main purpose is "To thank and honor veterans of  
the Vietnam War... for their service and sacrifice on behalf of the  
United States and to thank and honor the families of these veterans.  
To highlight the service of the Armed Forces during the Vietnam War  
and the contributions of Federal agencies and governmental and non- 
governmental organizations that served with, or in support of, the  
Armed Forces. To pay tribute to the contributions made on the home  
front by the people of the United States during the Vietnam War...."

Thousands of community, veteran, and various nongovernmental  
organizations throughout the U.S. are expected to join the  
Commemorative Partner Program "to assist federal, state and local  
authorities to assist a grateful nation in thanking and honoring our  
Vietnam Veterans and their families. Commemorative Partners are  
encouraged to participate... by planning and conducting events and  
activities that will recognize the Vietnam Veterans and their  
families’ service, valor, and sacrifice."

In addition the government and its "partners" will be distributing  
educational materials about the war, according to the Pentagon, but it  
is unlikely that the Vietnamese side of the story or that of the  
multitude of war resisters in the U.S., civilian and military, will  
receive favorable attention. Many facts, including the origins of the  
war will undoubtedly be changed to conform to the commemoration's main  
goal of minimizing Washington's defeat and maximizing the heroism and  
loyalty of the troops.

Officially, the Vietnam war lasted 11 years (1962-1973), but U.S.  
involvement actually continued for 21 years (1954-1975). The U.S.  
financially supported the restoration of French colonial control of  
Vietnam and all of Indochina after the defeat of Japanese imperialism  
in 1945 (Japan earlier displaced French rule). By 1954, Washington not  
only supplied money and advisers but sent 352 Americans to Vietnam in  
a "Military Assistance Advisory group" supporting the French against  
liberation forces led by the Vietnamese Communist Party. The  
liberators defeated the French army at the historic battle of Dien  
Bien Phu that same year.

The Geneva Conference of 1954, facilitating impending French  
withdrawal, established that Vietnam would be divided temporarily into  
two halves until free elections were held in 1956 to determine whether  
the liberation forces, led by Ho Chi Minh, or Emperor Bao Dai, who had  
collaborated with both French and Japanese occupation forces and was a  
puppet of the U.S., would rule the unified state.

It is doubtful that the commemoration is going to emphasize the fact  
that the U.S., led by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, used its power  
to prevent nationwide elections from taking place when it became clear  
that Ho Chi Minh would win 80% of the vote. Eisenhower acknowledged  
this in his memoirs. Instead, Washington allied itself to right wing  
forces in the southern sector to declare "South Vietnam" to be a  
separate state for the first time in history and set about financing,  
training and controlling a large southern military force to prevent  
reunification. The U.S. dominated the Saigon government throughout the  
following war.

When Paris withdrew remaining French troops in April 1956, according  
to John Prados in "Vietnam: The History of an Unwinnable war,  
1945-1975" (2009), "their departure made America South Vietnam's big  
brother," i.e., overlord and military protector against popular  
liberation forces in the southern half of the country.

By June 1962, 9,700 U.S. "military advisers" plus a large number of  
CIA agents were training and fighting to support the corrupt U.S.- 
backed regime in Saigon (now Ho Chi Minh City), at which time  
President Kennedy's Defense Secretary, Robert McNamara,  announced  
that "every quantitative measure shows that we're wining the war."

By 1968, when the number of U.S. troops attained their apogee of  
535,040, Washington was obviously losing to its tenacious opponent.  
This is when Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson decided not to  
seek reelection rather than face the humiliation of defeat. Republican  
President Richard M. Nixon succeeded to the presidency and vastly  
increased the bombings while also calling for negotiations to end the  
war. Facing an impending defeat and political catastrophe, American  
troops pulled out in 1973. The CIA and some U.S. military personnel  
and political advisers remained in diminished South Vietnam assisting  
the right wing government in Saigon until April 1975 when the entire  
country was liberated.

The U.S. lost 58,151 troops in the war. Between four and five million  
Vietnamese civilians and soldiers were killed on both sides in a  
catastrophe that could have been entirely avoided had Washington  
allowed the free elections to take place. Over a million civilians in  
neighboring Laos and Cambodia also were killed or wounded by U.S.  
firepower.

Vietnam, north and south, was pulverized by U.S. bombs and shells. The  
Pentagon detonated 15,500,000 tons of ground and air munitions on the  
three countries of Indochina, 12,000,000 tons on South Vietnam alone  
in a failed effort to smash the National Liberation Front backed by  
the North Vietnamese army. By comparison, the U.S. detonated only  
6,000,000 tons of ground and air munitions throughout World War II in  
Europe and the Far East. All told, by the end of the war, 26,000,000  
bomb craters pockmarked Indochina, overwhelmingly from U.S. weapons  
and bombers.

The Pentagon also dumped 18,000,000 gallons of herbicides to defoliate  
several million acres of farmland and forests. Millions of Vietnamese  
suffered illness, birth defects and deaths from these poisonous  
chemicals. The AP recently reported from Hanoi, Vietnam's capital,  
that "More than 100,000 Vietnamese have been killed or injured by land  
mines or other abandoned explosives since the Vietnam War ended nearly  
40 years ago, and clearing all of the country will take decades more."

It should also be mentioned — since it will be suppressed during the  
commemoration — that U.S. forces, including the CIA and the Pentagon- 
controlled South Vietnamese military, tortured many thousands of  
"suspected" supporters of the liberation struggle, frequently with  
portable electrical current. An estimated 40,000 "Vietcong" (suspected  
members or supporters of the NLF) were murdered during the long- 
running "Operation Phoenix" assassination campaign conducted by the  
CIA, Special Forces and killer units of the Saigon forces.

There were three main fronts in the Vietnam war, in this order: First,  
the battlefields of Indochina. Second, the massive antiwar movement  
within the United States and international support for Vietnam. Third,  
the Paris Peace Talks. Well over 60% of the American people opposed  
the war by the late 1960s-early '70s. The first peace protest took  
place in 1962; the first very large protest took place in Washington  
in 1965. Subsequently there were thousands of antiwar demonstrations  
large and small in cities, towns, and campuses all over America.

[Disclosure; This writer was a war opponent and a conscientious  
objector during this period. His information about the war derives  
from when he functioned as the news editor, managing editor and then  
chief editor of the largest independent leftist paper in the U.S. at  
the time, the weekly Guardian. This publication thoroughly covered the  
war, peace movement, antiwar veterans (Vietnam Veterans Against the  
War [VVAW] was founded in 1967 and is still active today), the  
extraordinary resistance of active duty troops in Vietnam and at U.S.  
bases and COs in prison or in Canada and Europe throughout the period  
of conflict.]

Most of the allegations about insults directed at solders or vets from  
war opponents have been fabrications to discredit the antiwar forces —  
falsehoods Obama chose to repeat as part of the Pentagon's campaign to  
reverse history's negative verdict on the war in Vietnam. The peace  
movement's targets were the warmakers in Washington and their allies  
abroad, not members of a largely conscript army. Perhaps the most  
notorious of the false accusations were frequent reports about antiwar  
individuals "spitting" at GIs and vets. The rumors were so wild that  
sociologist Jerry Lembcke wrote a book exposing the lies — "The  
Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam," New York  
University Press, 1998.

It's extremely doubtful that the war commemoration will dare touch  
honestly upon the movement of active duty troops against the war and  
the hundreds of cases killing their own officers.

Historian Howard Zinn included this paragraph on the opposition to the  
Vietnam War by American soldiers in his "People's History of the  
United States":

"The capacity for independent judgment among ordinary Americans is  
probably best shown by the swift development of antiwar feeling among  
American GIs — volunteers and draftees who came mostly from lower- 
income groups. There had been, earlier in American history, instances  
of soldiers' disaffection from the war: isolated mutinies in the  
Revolutionary War, refusal of reenlistment in the midst of hostilities  
in the Mexican war, desertion and conscientious objection in World War  
I and World War II. But Vietnam produced opposition by soldiers and  
veterans on a scale, and with a fervor, never seen before."

According to the Washington Peace Center: "During the Vietnam War, the  
military ranks carried out mass resistance on bases and ships in  
Southeast Asia, the Pacific, U.S. and Europe. Military resistance was  
instrumental in ending the war by making the ranks politically  
unreliable. This history is well documented in 'Soldiers in Revolt' by  
David Cortright and the recent film 'Sir! No Sir!'"

One of the key reports on GI resistance was written by Col. Robert D.  
Heinl Jr. and published in the Armed Forces Journal of June 7, 1971.  
He began: "The morale, discipline and battle worthiness of the U.S.  
Armed Forces are, with a few salient exceptions, lower and worse than  
at anytime in this century and possibly in the history of the United  
States.

"By every conceivable indicator, our army that now remains in Vietnam  
is in a state approaching collapse, with individual units avoiding or  
having refused combat, murdering their officers and non-commissioned  
officers, drug-ridden, and dispirited where not near mutinous.  
Elsewhere than Vietnam, the situation is nearly as serious.

"Intolerably clobbered and buffeted from without and within by social  
turbulence, pandemic drug addiction, race war, sedition, civilian  
scapegoatise, draftee recalcitrance and malevolence, barracks theft  
and common crime, unsupported in their travail by the general  
government, in Congress as well as the executive branch, distrusted,  
disliked, and often reviled by the public, the uniformed services  
today are places of agony for the loyal, silent professions who  
doggedly hang on and try to keep the ship afloat."

According to the 2003 book by Christian Appy, "Patriots: The Vietnam  
War Remembered from All Sides," Gen. Creighton Abrams — the U.S.  
military commander in Vietnam — made this comment in 1971 after an  
investigation: "Is this a god-damned army or a mental hospital?  
Officers are afraid to lead their men into battle, and the men won’t  
follow. Jesus Christ! What happened?"

Another former Army colonel in Vietnam, Andrew J. Bacevich Sr. (now a  
professor of international relations at Boston University and a strong  
opponent of U.S. foreign/military policy) wrote a book about how the  
U.S. military labored for a dozen years after the defeat to revamp its  
war strategy and tactics. ("The New American Militarism: How Americans  
Are Seduced by War," Oxford University Press, 2005.) One major  
conclusion was that a conscript army may become unreliable if the war  
is considered unjust in nature and unpopular at home. This is why  
conscription was ended for good and the Pentagon now relies on better  
paid professional standing military supplemented by a large number of  
contractors and mercenaries, who perform many duties that were once  
handled by regular soldiers.

Veterans' movements from the professional military of contemporary  
wars, such as Iraq Veterans Against the War and March Forward, as well  
as from the Vietnam era, are still out in the streets opposing  
imperialist wars, and public opinion polls reveal that over 60% of the  
American people oppose the Afghan adventure.

Despite the colossal damage the U.S. inflicted on Vietnam and its  
people during the war years, the country has emerged from the ashes  
and is taking steps toward becoming a relatively prosperous society  
led by the Communist Party. The Hanoi government has received no help  
from Washington. During the Paris Peace Talks of 1973, Nixon promised  
Prime Minister Pham Van Dong in writing that the U.S. would pay  
Vietnam $3.5 billion in reparations. This promise turned out to be  
worthless.

What strikes visitors to Vietnam in recent years, including this  
writer, is that the country appears to have come to terms with what it  
calls the American War far better than America has come to terms with  
the Vietnam War. Despite the hardships inflicted upon Vietnam, the  
government and people appear to hold no grudges against the United  
States.

Hanoi has several times extended the welcome mat to former  
antagonists, urging Americans and residents of southern Vietnam who  
now live abroad to "close the past and look to the future." Wherever  
touring U.S. citizens — including former GIs — travel in Vietnam, they  
are met with the same respect as visitors from other countries.

In the U.S., the Vietnam war still evokes fighting words in some  
quarters. Some Americans still argue that the U.S. "could have won if  
it didn’t have one hand tied behind its back" (i.e., used nuclear  
weapons), and some continue to hate the antiwar protesters of  
yesteryear, just as they do demonstrators against today’s wars. And  
some others — in Congress, the White House and the Pentagon — still  
seem to continue fighting the war by organizing a massive propaganda  
effort to distort the history of Washington's aggression and  
unspeakable brutality in Vietnam.

http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/2012/06/06-07-12-reversing-vietnam-verdict.html+

###
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20120607/1f15787c/attachment-0001.html>