Paul1405, "Australia was an aggressor in Vietnam"

Oh no Australia wasn't! How quick you are to damn Australia and ll so unnecessary.

In the North, the nationalists had been taken over by the Communists well back, in the Fort Indochina War. The NLF, communists supported by China (whom Vietnam had been fighting for 2,000 years!) and with Russian weapons were the aggressors who moved South and there is plenty of evidence of the villainous acts of cruelty and murder they waged against elected leaders who didn't see things their way, at local level especially.

While I disagree with Australia's involvement in Vietnam (and the US role too), when the US and Australia became involved it was a clear case of communist takeover of north and south and not nationalists as you believe.

It was the naivete of the US in supporting Diem, a bad SOB, that resulted in the inevitable communist takeover of the South. Contrary to what US hating leftists believe, and they do re-write history, the US didn't have any reasons for reluctantly supporting Diem apart from the appearance that he was the best available out of even more corrupt politicians.

That should be FIRST Indochina War.

Paul1405, I sincerely hope you are reassured and thankful to know that Australia was not the aggressor in Vietnam.

Re the argument about Vietnam and the involvement of the US, Australia and China. Those of you arguing for the 'justness' of this dreadful war do understand how that came about don't you? Why and how the Vietnamese Nationalists sought help from communist China?

That was a wholly avoidable war started with lies after serious betrayal. The horrors visited upon both the Vietnamese and the soldiers from the US and Australia lie squarely with the presidents of the US and the PM of Australia.

Just like the invasion of Iraq and the horrors and destruction that has followed this. Abbott is now all ready for the glory of being a 'war' PM and has no concept or conscience of what he is committing Australian fighting men and women to. But then, this government has no concept of what the ADF is for in the first place. I challenge any member of this cabinet, including members of the waffily, useless ALP to commit one of their own children to service.

I have soldiers and officers over 4 generations in my family, including 2 sons. I'm not an airy fairy 'pacifist'. The results of war are real and terrible on those fighting and the citizens in a war-zone, even during so-called 'just' wars, so before committing a nation's soldiers, it must be absolutely clear the sacrifices are justified and this needs to be explained to the nation. Australia does not need to be the first with soldiers on the ground. In actual fact, the ONLY Western nation to do so.

OTB,

During the early part of the Vietnam war I was in the happy position of putting most captured weapons through a process that eliminated any lurgies that might have been in or under the woodwork, a good cooking in the Trichloroethylene tank. This stuff plus the heat removed oils, greases and just about everything else.
The weapons were then stripped, cleaned internally, the woodwork treated with raw linseed oil and then they were reassembled and returned to Ordnance.
During the first year of our involvement the only captured weapons that I handled were bolt action rifles, British, French and Japanese of WW II and earlier vintage, US .30/06 Garands, M1 Carbines and Thompson Sub-machine guns all probably supplied by the US in WW II; all were well worn and one Garand was so worn that someone had tried to restore some accuracy by drilling out the rifling for about three inches at the muzzle. The barrel of this rifle was so worn that a .30 calibre bullet could be pushed through the barrel by hand. Years of wet conditions had swelled most of the woodwork to well over its manufactured size.

Is Mise,

Thanks. I don't doubt that, the (communist led) NLF was encouraging insurrection in the south and many were armed with cached weapons. Supply problems, both north and south.

Yvonne,

You might like to romance the NLF as nationalist freedom fighters, but they were far from that, as evidenced by the death squads that killed local officials in the south.

Maybe you should start with ordinary old Wikipedia and remove the eye patch before awarding all blame to the US and Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Cong

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for this thread. In response to your wise reflections, here is a plea for peace and love from ISIL, (care of The Guardian, that right-wing rag):

“If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be,” said al-Adnani.

“Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling. Both of them are disbelievers.”

Actually, I can't believe that any Muslim could say this, because after all, Islam is a religion of peace.

Another item in the newspapers: Philip Adams gave us the full depths of his understanding yesterday in his comments about ISIL, that Saudi Arabia also carries out beheadings: forty or more this year, so nyah nyah, by implication ISIL can't be that bad. So how many do you reckon ISIL has carried out in the past week ? Of children, let's say ? Stupid man.

On the other hand, what's the common basis of such beheadings ? Islam ? Shari'a ? Being Arab ? Being reactionary ?

Or all of the above ?

Joe