Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN MURTHA...(FReepers, Please Read...)
Philadelphia Daily News ^ | 04.04.06 | JOHN A. LUCAS

Posted on 04/04/2006 3:26:43 PM PDT by Fintan

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 last
To: Texas Mom


81 posted on 04/05/2006 4:40:30 AM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

How North Vietnam Won The War

(Taken from The Wall Street Journal, Thursday August 3, 1995)

What did the North Vietnamese leadership think of the American antiwar movement? What was the purpose of the Tet Offensive? How could the U.S. have been more successful in fighting the Vietnam War? Bui Tin, a former colonel in the North Vietnamese army, answers these questions in the following excerpts from an interview conducted by Stephen Young, a Minnesota attorney and human-rights activist. Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of North Vietnam's army, received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. He later became editor of the People's Daily, the official newspaper of Vietnam. He now lives in Paris, where he immigrated after becoming disillusioned with the fruits of Vietnamese communism.

Question: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?

Answer: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said, "We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."

Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?

A: It was essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.

Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?

A: Keenly.

Q: Why?

A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.

Q: How could the Americans have won the war?

A: Cut the Ho Chi Minh trail inside Laos. If Johnson had granted [Gen. William] Westmoreland's requests to enter Laos and block the Ho Chi Minh trail, Hanoi could not have won the war.

Q: Anything else?

A: Train South Vietnam's generals. The junior South Vietnamese officers were good, competent and courageous, but the commanding general officers were inept.

Q: Did Hanoi expect that the National Liberation Front would win power in South Vietnam?

A: No. Gen. [Vo Nguyen] Giap [commander of the North Vietnamese army] believed that guerrilla warfare was important but not sufficient for victory. Regular military divisions with artillery and armor would be needed. The Chinese believed in fighting only with guerrillas, but we had a different approach. The Chinese were reluctant to help us. Soviet aid made the war possible. Le Duan [secretary general of the Vietnamese Communist Party] once told Mao Tse-tung that if you help us, we are sure to win; if you don't, we will still win, but we will have to sacrifice one or two million more soldiers to do so.

Q: Was the National Liberation Front an independent political movement of South Vietnamese?

A: No. It was set up by our Communist Party to implement a decision of the Third Party Congress of September 1960. We always said there was only one party, only one army in the war to liberate the South and unify the nation. At all times there was only one party commissar in command of the South.

Q: Why was the Ho Chi Minh trail so important?

A: It was the only way to bring sufficient military power to bear on the fighting in the South. Building and maintaining the trail was a huge effort, involving tens of thousands of soldiers, drivers, repair teams, medical stations, communication units.

Q: What of American bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail?

A: Not very effective. Our operations were never compromised by attacks on the trail. At times, accurate B-52 strikes would cause real damage, but we put so much in at the top of the trail that enough men and weapons to prolong the war always came out the bottom. Bombing by smaller planes rarely hit significant targets.

Q: What of American bombing of North Vietnam?

A: If all the bombing had been concentrated at one time, it would have hurt our efforts. But the bombing was expanded in slow stages under Johnson and it didn't worry us. We had plenty of times to prepare alternative routes and facilities. We always had stockpiles of rice ready to feed the people for months if a harvest were damaged. The Soviets bought rice from Thailand for us.

Q: What was the purpose of the 1968 Tet Offensive?

A: To relieve the pressure Gen. Westmoreland was putting on us in late 1966 and 1967 and to weaken American resolve during a presidential election year.

Q: What about Gen. Westmoreland's strategy and tactics caused you concern?

A: Our senior commander in the South, Gen. Nguyen Chi Thanh, knew that we were losing base areas, control of the rural population and that his main forces were being pushed out to the borders of South Vietnam. He also worried that Westmoreland might receive permission to enter Laos and cut the Ho Chi Minh Trail.

In January 1967, after discussions with Le Duan, Thanh proposed the Tet Offensive. Thanh was the senior member of the Politburo in South Vietnam. He supervised the entire war effort. Thanh's struggle philosophy was that "America is wealthy but not resolute," and "squeeze tight to the American chest and attack." He was invited up to Hanoi for further discussions. He went on commercial flights with a false passport from Cambodia to Hong Kong and then to Hanoi. Only in July was his plan adopted by the leadership. Then Johnson had rejected Westmoreland's request for 200,000 more troops. We realized that America had made its maximum military commitment to the war. Vietnam was not sufficiently important for the United States to call up its reserves. We had stretched American power to a breaking point. When more frustration set in, all the Americans could do would be to withdraw; they had no more troops to send over.

Tet was designed to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly defended parts of South Vietnam cities during a holiday and a truce when few South Vietnamese troops would be on duty. Before the main attack, we would entice American units to advance close to the borders, away from the cities. By attacking all South Vietnam's major cities, we would spread out our forces and neutralize the impact of American firepower. Attacking on a broad front, we would lose some battles but win others. We used local forces nearby each target to frustrate discovery of our plans. Small teams, like the one which attacked the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, would be sufficient. It was a guerrilla strategy of hit-and-run raids.

Q: What about the results?

A: Our losses were staggering and a complete surprise;. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for re-election. The second and third waves in May and September were, in retrospect, mistakes. Our forces in the South were nearly wiped out by all the fighting in 1968. It took us until 1971 to re-establish our presence, but we had to use North Vietnamese troops as local guerrillas. If the American forces had not begun to withdraw under Nixon in 1969, they could have punished us severely. We suffered badly in 1969 and 1970 as it was.

Q: What of Nixon?

A: Well, when Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong [prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, "he's the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn't elect him; even if you gave him candy, he doesn't dare to intervene in Vietnam again." We tested Ford's resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52's in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South Vietnam.

Q: What else?

A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.

82 posted on 04/05/2006 4:43:39 AM PDT by Stashiu (RVN, 1969-70)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Fintan
Hear, Hear!

I find it unbelievable that so many people can't understand what this man has so succictly stated. How can we turn away from this fight when the enemy has so clearly stated what their goals are

Is the US so craven that we will turn away from our duty; turn away from our own sacred responsibility to our children?

Nothing less than that is at stake this November. God forgive us if we fail and God condemn us if through laziness or apathy we allow the enemies of our country, both foreign and domestic, to turn us away from this critical battle.

83 posted on 04/05/2006 4:49:35 AM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan
Bump for a great American, father of another great American.

This is a true War of the Worlds: a war between the 12th century world of conquest and hatred and submission and the modern world of freedom and happiness and self-determination. This is MY war, too. My husband has been in it twice (once in Iraq, once in Afghanistan), and I couldn't be more proud. Likewise, I am proud of each and every soldier, sailor, airman, marine out there fighting this war on behalf of us all.

Thanks, Fintan, for posting this great editorial.

84 posted on 04/05/2006 5:13:27 AM PDT by shezza (God bless our military heroes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
I live in Johnstown. The Republicans are going to run a female from Washington County against Murtha in the general election this fall. MURTHA CAN BE BEATEN if the Republicans are willing to spent the time, money and effort to do it. Since his flip-flop on the war he has lost support in his district.
85 posted on 04/05/2006 5:21:53 AM PDT by Jooge (Jooge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Fintan; Salem

Dear Mr. Knox,

Amen, right on, and God bless you real, real good.

As for congress-critter Murtha, may a very large box of itching powders be sprinkled in his drawers, may he break out in hives the size of quarters, may his drawers always be two sizes too small, and may all his teeth fall out of his trash-talking carpetbagging mouth, except for one, and that one should remain for a toothache!

86 posted on 04/05/2006 5:50:01 AM PDT by Convert from ECUSA (The "religion of peace" is actually the religion of constant rage and riots.I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fintan

If it is a duplicate, it NEEDED SAYING AGAIN. No worries. Damn, I love AMERICANS like this. Just love em. Hate the others, but love these folks!

87 posted on 04/05/2006 7:50:33 AM PDT by RetiredArmy (Democrats: The communist, socialist, and Al Qaeda loving party of America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
Murtha is a traitor!

Be Ever Vigilant!

88 posted on 04/05/2006 9:09:23 AM PDT by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jooge
I live in Johnstown.

See post #9.

89 posted on 04/05/2006 9:25:08 AM PDT by smoothsailing (FIRE MURTHA-Support Diana Irey--
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: smoothsailing; freema
What a powerful letter!

We have so much to be ashamed of in our PA politicians, but Murtha is King Turd on the sh!theap (and that's saying a lot with competition like Fast Eddie).

I thought I was on your Irey ping list, but if there's a new campaign list please add me, freema

90 posted on 04/05/2006 1:27:30 PM PDT by Sisku Hanne (Happy 2006...The Year of the Black Conservative!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sisku Hanne

Don't know what happened! You're on.

91 posted on 04/05/2006 3:27:33 PM PDT by freema (Proud Marine FRiend, Mom, Aunt, Sister, Friend, Wife, Daughter, Niece)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Jooge
MURTHA CAN BE BEATEN if the Republicans are willing to spent the time, money and effort to do it. Since his flip-flop on the war he has lost support in his district.

Big IF there. I was raised in Johnstown and still have lots of family there. I have two nephews who are active in Pa Republican politics but the rest of the family pretty much sits on their thumbs.

I send them all information on this election and the Governors race hoping to lite a fire under them.

No doubt in my mind, they will vote but to get politically active and work is something else.

Murtha must be beaten in November.

92 posted on 04/05/2006 11:14:19 PM PDT by Texas Mom (When they kill enough of us will we finally start profiling??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson