Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
You’re really gung-ho, Sebastien! Airborne ranger?
Sebastien Zorn Said:
The legendary general had made headlines recently with his revelation last spring that the government of North Vietnam was literally days away from quitting the Vietnam War, even as its troops overran Saigon in 1975. He was interviewed by Duffel Blog in April 2013 at his private residence in Hanoi, on the anniversary of the Fall of Saigon.
“As our tanks were rolling into the presidential palace [in South Vietnam], if America had conducted just one more air strike we would have thrown in the towel,” Giap admitted. “And thank god they didn’t,” Giap added, “because, let me tell you, that tank was running on fumes.”
The general, who had previously given multiple interviews about the conduct of North Vietnam during the conflict, told reporters that he felt the time was right to set the record straight about “our long national nightmare.”
“We had actually been looking for a way to end this endless war or ‘quagmire,’ that we had found ourselves stuck in, ever since 1945,” Giap said. “Just when we thought we were done fighting the Japanese we found ourselves fighting the French and then the Americans.”
Giap also added, “We weren’t even supposed to win [the Vietnam War]. We were just trying to get rid of a group of political prisoners and create the face-saving conditions for us to sue for peace.”
After ten years of bloody stalemate, North Vietnam launched one, last-chance offensive in 1975 using several thousand “expendable” old men and prisoners, pushing mostly wooden tanks and carrying loudspeakers meant to simulate an entire army.
“When we saw pictures of the American helicopters over their embassy, we just assumed they were bringing in reinforcements and figured the game was up,” Giap laughed. “Even after the South Vietnamese surrendered, we thought it was some kind of trick and fled to the hills for a month until we found out we’d actually overrun the country.”
Duong Xuan Dung, a soldier with the 324th Division in the People’s Army of Vietnam, was one of Giap’s soldiers.
“They just kept sending us south and assumed we were all getting killed,” Comrade Dung told Duffel Blog in his village of Ap Bac. In reality we kept looking for someone to surrender to, but all the South Vietnamese we saw ran away from us. We figured if we went all the way to Saigon, someone there would have to accept our surrender.”
“I think when we burst into the presidential palace it was a race to see who could surrender faster — us or the enemy.”
@ Michael S:
Do you dispute that S. Korea is a free and prosperous democracy? Are they a threat to us? Give me a break.
I guess you know better than the commander of the N. Vietnamese Forces just because you were there, huh?
In Memoriam: Vo Nguyen Giap, Admitted US ‘Almost Won’ Vietnam War In 1975
https://www.duffelblog.com/2013/10/vietnam-war-winning/
Being somewhere doesn’t mean knowing anything, necessarily. That’s why short term travel is often pointless.
@ Sebastien Zorn:
“WE would have prevailed in Vietnam?”
Are you a Vietnam vet? We “lost” in Vietnam; and now, they are our business partners. We “drew” in Korea; and now, they threaten our existence. I was in the US Army during Vietnam, and read Vietnamese newspapers, N. & S., in the original language. It was obvious that we would ultimately lose. Nixon was just trying to do it “with honor”, and we lost tens of thousands of lives in the process.
In Korea, I’m not at all certain that the S. Koreans are on our side. They seem eager to appease both China and Kim Jong Un. The Japanese are more eager to have US go in and do something about their dangerous neighbor; but plan to do little themselves, much less on their own. In the end, we need to act, unilaterally if need be, to protect OUR interests there, if it means blowing the whole peninsula to kingdom come. I hope our frienemies in Seoul understand that; and I certainly hope our leaders in Washington do. That’s my opinion, for what it’s worth.
@ Michael S:
But, for the necessary and just attacks on Hollywood by Congress in the early 50’s, I have no doubts whatsoever, that S. Korea would today be just part of the N. Korean hell -hole.
If the media and college students had been suppressed like they should have been, and would have been if the Smith Act hadn’t been gutted by the Supreme Court in the late 50s, we would have prevailed in Vietnam, and all future conflicts, as well.
@ Michael S:
Saudi Arabia is another one that votes against Israel in the UN but, under the Crown Prince’s new regime, is leading the way in making rapprochement with Israel and intimidating those who won’t.
Truth is, absent Security Council sanctions, it’s all so much lip service and hot air. Netanyahu was right. In the real world of economics and military affairs, the world is growing closer to Israel.
As long as Trump keeps the UN from imposing sanctions, Israel is safe to do whatever she wants. Truth is, nobody in the board rooms really care.
As far as China is concerned, who said anything about a utopia. It’s what I just said.
Herzl understood correctly that states — with some exceptions, like Nazi Germany or Islamist Iran, normally operate according to self-interest. And it is not in anybody’s self-interest to boycott Israel.
Needless to say, nobody has a chance against Israel militarily and they know it, hence the diplomatic duplicity. Their only chance of defeating us is to get us to cut our own throats out of fear or guilt. That’s why the story of Socrates provides such an important lesson. He got what was coming to him. Unlike Jane Fonda, Bernadine Dorn, etc.
e.g.,
“Isis-affiliated fighters “apologized” after launching an attack on Israeli soldiers, the country’s former defense minister has claimed.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-israel-defence-force-apology-attack-unit-golan-heights-defense-minister-moshe-ya-alon-a7700616.html
@ Sebastien Zorn:
Hello, Sebastien. You said,
“That’s the problem with not-for-profit organizations, like the UN, or universities, they are accountable to no one by the power of the purse, no one and nothing, including reality.”
That’s a good point. I hadn’t thought of it.
Concerning China, I think some people romanticize it as a Utopian alternative to the US as the leader of the world. Having close ties there, I can assure one and all that the place is not a utopia; and in fact, it has been heading south, both politically and economically. In terms of liberties, such as freedom of religion, it seems to be heading back to the Dark Ages.
About the Red Med, Herzl envisioned a canal through Israel, replacing Suez. It never happened, probably for good reasons like geography.
I suppose the greatest advantage of a trans-Israel route, either a canal, railroad or, for that matter, an air corridor, is that Israel could, AT TIMES, provide a politically more stable alternative to an Egypt that could become troublesome. This would depend on good Israel-Saudi relations which, considering the latter’s disgusting performance in the recent UN vote (wherein the K of SA reflexively voted against Israel AND the US), that day seems a long way off. At best, the Red Med seems to be in a niche market, if the Saudis honor freedom of navigation at times when Egypt does not.
Oh, yes. There is also the price factor. Egypt holds a monopoly, and can charge outrageous prices. Israel could provide competition. In a politically stable world, this would be true. China has a certain degree of clout, and might be able to muscle its “One Road, One Path” through the Straits of Tiran. The prospect doesn’t look inviting to me, though: it’s like hiring the Sinaloa Drug Cartel to offset the Mafia: Either way, the price is ultimately too high.
In import, export and foreign investment, China is Israel’s second largest trading partner. Technion just opened the first Israeli campus in China, others expected to follow. The Red Med railway, an Israeli/Chinese collaboration in Israel is intended to replace the Suez Canal. If the super-powers, in economic rivalry, have to outdo each other in trying to woo Israel, that’s a good thing. If only it would somehow trickle down into the subsidized fantasy world of UN diplomacy. That’s the problem with not-for-profit organizations, like the UN, or universities, they are accountable to no one by the power of the purse, no one and nothing, including reality.
In exchange for their work, China provides NoKo with the nuke/missiles tech and a life line.