Cryptcl: Rebels Without A Cause

Secular progressive liberal leftists were influencial and in fact pivotol in the cut and run decisions of the Vietnam war. Their demonstrations, high profile speakers, willingness to use violence, and their convoluted moral stance exaggerated by the MSM (Walter Cronkite, NBC, CBS, ABC, etc.) provided aid and comfort to the North Vietnamese/Viet Cong, and in fact ended the war in favor of the communists. Some important details of the Vietnam war are often overlooked.
The United States had lost 50,000 soldiers, yet estimated casualties of the communists was much larger at 1,100.000. Strategically the United States won every major battle fought in the Vietnam war. This was never reported by the MSM. In every major battle initiated by the North Vietnamese, they did not achieve their objective. In every major battle initiated by the United States, the objective of the battle was achieved. In every major battle there were more communist casualties than American casualties. Few Americans know this. In fact the Tet Offensive is always portrayed in the media as a “shock, demoralizing, decisive, and unexpected” attack on the United States in Vietnam, but it was in fact a communist failure. The American military did not lose the Tet Offensive as many major MSM outlets have implied. The American military was not shocked and surprised, its just that the MSM portrayed it that way. The communists lost that battle too.

Upon his retirement General Thi Ngoc Diep Nguyen wrote his biography. In this biography he states that all attempts to overpower and defeat the United States failed. The Tet Offensive, was in fact, his army’s last “hail mary” to try and turn the war’s outcome in favor of the communists. His army lost the Tet Offensive, but during and after it the American citizen’s attitude toward support of the war was quickly turning to the communists advantage. The anti-war demonstrators were not a majority in the United States. They did however have the complete support of the MSM. This support included the daily presentation of the horrors of war through battlefield films, and anti-war messages from MSM representatives such as news anchor Walter Cronkite. The constant anti-war drum beating by the MSM is what finally forced the “cut and run” strategy, resulting in the withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam. Many in the anti-war community considered this a victory that proves the anti-war opinion was the morally correct choice. It was not the morally correct choice for America, Americans, nor the South Vietnamese.

America, on the request and pleading of the French, sent forces to Vietnam to help defend French South Vietnam from the communists who were trying to push France out of Indochina. America should have avoided involvement in Vietnam and let France cleanup it’s own mess. Unfortunately, America has always had the foreign policy of trying to deter and prevent the spread of communism whenever it can. It is a “big picture” morally correct policy that attempts to prevent the spread of the cruel and brutal tyranny of communism. One often hears from anti-war types “What are we fighting for ?” . Everyone knew it was to prevent the spread of communism. Preventing communism was the morally correct thing to do. Also unfortunately, the selfish, shallow, and betraying French stopped their fighting during the battle of Dien Bien Phu. They turned their backs on America, stranding the Americans that came to help them. French troops were unexpectedly and suddenly evacuated from Indochina leaving only America to fight the communists. America stayed to support the South Vietnamese people against the  brutality of communism. America tried to do the best job it could.

Those who believe that the American withdrawal from Vietnam was a correct moral decision might want to look at some of the consequences of that withdrawal. Some of the consequences were:

  • South Vietnamese were brutalized by the new communist regime that took over. Estimates range from 1 to 2 million citizens were either executed or sent to re-education camps. Any South Vietnamese who collaborated with America, supported America, fought for America, or aid and abetted America were brutalized as traitors and spies along with their family members.
  • The South Vietnamese, because of America’s withdrawal, have been living for decades under communism. Communism has been cruel, brutal, and oppressive to the South Vietnamese. Just ask one. They will tell you that their world came to an end when the Americans left.
  • 50,000 Americans gave their lives for nothing because of the withdrawal. The goal of America was not achieved. America should have continued fighting until victory. American military owed it’s soldiers firm dedication to the goal of victory. Instead, America lost by giving up, and all those who died, died for nothing as the spread of communism was not prevented.
  • Giving up is a worst moral defeat than losing militarily. Fighting to the end is respected, taking your ball and going home in the middle of the game is never respected, and often raises questions about one’s character. America lost a lot of respect since the withdrawal and in some circles is accused of being as incompetent and weak as the French. Any time your military is compared to the French, as similarly weak, incompetent, without commitment or a “backbone”, it is time to seriously examine and re-assess your military actions. There’s a great saying in the military: “Fighting a war without the French is like going into battle and forgetting to bring your accordian”.
  • American anti-war protesters treated home-coming vets horribly. They were spit on, called names (“baby killer”), and insulted as if they were traitors of America instead of the patriots they were. It is unbelievable how badly these dedicated and heroic soldiers were treated.
  • In the 1960s, the role, influence, bias, and agenda of the MSM was starting to be revealed to many surprised citizen’s. Questions of what is “fair and balanced” entered the consciousness of the American people. Near the end of the Vietnam war, MSM figurehead Walter Cronkite was polled as the most trusted man in America. It was Walter Cronkite who during a news broadcast said “The war is not winnable”. No one knows what he based that opinion on, yet Americans convinced themselves he knew what he was talking about. In military circles, there were numerous accusations of treason against Walter Cronkite. From the point when Walter Cronkite stated “not winnable”, the obstacles to winning increased, and the fate of the communists improved. Communists had lost the military war, but thanks to American anti-war protesters and progressive news personnel in the MSM, the communists won the political war by just waiting and watching the political theater happening in America.
  • The confidence of the world in the commitment and “word” of America was deeply compromised by the cut and run withdrawal. Countries at risk for communist takeover now have to consider potential powerful minority opposition on the campuses of America. They must take into account the “emotional” impact of anti-war demonstrations when entering into bilateral security agreements with the United States.

Now there is something of some importance to understand. Many of these anti-war protesters now find themselves in positions of power and influence within the United States government, think tanks, as analysts, and as news contributors. These are people who incorrectly believe that they chose the correct moral option during the Vietnam war. These people are in positions of policy making in the current political landscape and they continue to be supported by the leftist bias of the MSM. They incorrectly think they were acting as patriots. They were not protesting against the evils of communism, as they should. No, instead they were protesting against America’s policy decisions without a complete set of facts on which to make that decision. These liberals erroneously believed they were more sophisticated and smarter than the government, military, and foreign policy experts in America. They made rash decisions and ignorant statements, and we can all now see there influence and behavior for what it was. A narcissist’s view of the world. Ignorant to the needs and troubles of other people’s in harm’s way. Only focused on their own self interest with the support of a leftist MSM.

Many were acting out a juvenile fantasy of being a “cool radical”. Long hair, protest marches, anti-war banners, sex, drugs, and rock n roll, all woven into a “cool radical liberal” 1960s personna. These radicals were all sleeping safely in their upper middle class beds at night, attending college classes, living on trust funds, using LSD and pot as often as possible. During the day they were protesting, insulting, demonizing, and endangering America and its soldiers. These soldiers, thousands of miles from home, halfway around the world, who were sleeping at night with one eye open. These soldiers would get up every morning, risk their life all day for America and the South Vietnamese, and then have to hear unsupported insults and accusations from home newspapers, news casts, and documented protests. How can military men and women focus on victory when their motivation is evaporating due to the selfish actions of irresponsible “radical pot heads”. There were many anti-war organizations on campuses during the era of Vietnam. Quite often members of these groups claimed veteran military battlefield experience in order to have more gravitas and influence on the American public. They later proved to be frauds and imposters. As Saul Alinksy says: “to lie for a good cause is perfectly acceptable”. As I say: “except you lose all credibility and you will never gain it back”.

An example of high profile “fraudulent” veterans includes senator John Kerry and his anti-war group called Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW). Some members of this group were valid veterans while other members were “fake veterans” having never been in the military or Vietnam. I guess this was one of those Saul Alinsky inspired “lying for a good cause” situations. They were a radical group that held meetings actually discussing whether they should assassinate sitting U.S. senators as protest. John Kerry attended that meeting, although he denies it.

There are additional curious situations surrounding John Kerry’s Vietnam medals. Some think Kerry received the Congressional Medal of Honor, he did not. It was Sen. Joseph R. Kerrey that received the Congressional Medal of Honor. In four months in a forward area, in minimal combat and no major battle, John Kerry accumulated 1 Silver Star, 1 Bronze Star with “V” Device, and 3 purple hearts. All those medals in such a short time must mean he is a combination of Audie Murphy and Superman. Amazingly he obtained 3 purple hearts yet has no visible scars from injuries. In U.S. military regulations it is written that anyone who receives 3 purple hearts can immediately request transfer to a non-combat area. Soon after getting these medals he was reassigned to be an assistant to a navy admiral.

One might assume his connections to those in power, Ted Kennedy, made his military career more politically motivated to aid him in any future political aspirations. During the 1960s with support of Ted Kennedy, John Kerry testified under oath before congress as part of the Winter Soldier hearings. John Kerry lied and accused his fellow soldiers of raping women, killing children, killing innocent civilians, burning down villages for no reason, killing dogs, and terrorizing the Vietnam countryside, just like Attila the Hun. You can view his testimony as the first, in a long line of lies that John Kerry will use to achieve his political aspirations of becoming a U.S. senator, and almost becoming president. In a VVAW anti-war demonstration, participants threw away their medals to prove they mean nothing. According to Kerry, he threw away his medals onto the steps of the U.S. capital. This is interesting since years later, after Kerry was elected senator, in his office is a display of all his medals he said he threw away. I guess this is another example of “lying for a good cause”.

So these days when you see demonstrations from the progressive left against military and government, remember that these people are more interested in press coverage and personal gain than the quality of their factual argument(s). Remember they still have the support of the leftist MSM. They are more interested in posing for the camera and seeing their name in the paper. They are more interested in spreading the dogma of socialism and communism than protecting America. They are more interested in making laws and rules that restrict the liberty of Americans. They are happy being “useful fools” for the communist regimes around the world.

These ” elitist progressives” will make laws regulating: what we can drink, what we can eat, where we can go, what natural resources we can use, what natural resources we can drill or mine, what type of cars are allowed, what type of travel is allowed, what type of light bulbs we can use, what we can throw out, etc. etc. etc.  If you don’t believe it, just look at the laws currently being passed in “liberal progressive” San Francisco. They now have 3 types of garbage cans required for disposal and use of all three cans is monitored to make sure everyone is properly sorting and disposing their garbage. The San Francisco legislature has outlawed the MacDonald’s happy meal, and is currently trying to outlaw soft drinks. This has support of the MSM. They idolize people like Che Guevara as a hero of their radical cause, and ignore his murderous and terrorist crimes. These individuals have to be confronted with the facts that defeat their positions, policies, opinions, and rhetoric whenever possible. They need to realize that their assumed “superior elitist” world view more closely resembles fascism than a free society.

Historically, every nation that has socialist or communist governments have proven these forms of governments to be practically, financially, morally, and politically defective. Given time, all these nations will collapse from their unsustainable form of government.  Just like Che Guevara in Bolivia, who did not have support of the Bolivian people, these “liberal progressive leftist socialist communists” will not have the support of the majority of Americans, and are simply “rebels without a cause”.

Published in: on August 1, 2011 at 10:06 am  Leave a Comment  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: