The Vietnam War

[Eddie Teach]

How about Thailand? Malaysia? Laos?

[Malthus]

You assume it made sense to suck up to PRChina, or recognize them, or not surround them with a ring of steel through which no jobs could pass.

Who will feed North America's yellow fever if you do not allow for an endless importation of Chinese babes? 

Vietnam, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, etc.

Vietnam is still Commie, the Korean and Taiwan variety aren't endless, Phillipinas are more brown than yellow, and Japan - well, that leads to rampant Lettowism. 

[Jacob]

Well no. I don't think the alliance between Chinese communists and Vietnamese communists can be considered an alliance of convenience, anymore than the links between Chinese nationalists and Vietnamese nationalists can be. They were natural ideological allies in the cold war world.

The last time the Chinese came, they stayed a thousand years. The French are foreigners. They are weak. Colonialism is dying. The white man is finished in Asia. But if the Chinese stay now, they will never go. As for me, I prefer to sniff French shit for five years than to eat Chinese shit for the rest of my life.

[The Minsky Moment]

The Vietnamese and Chinese have been enemies since forever. Their alliance was purely one of convenience, and Vietnam could easily have been allied with the US against China (or vice versa). I agree that this was politically impossible for the US to do, because of domestic politics.

Well no. I don't think the alliance between Chinese communists and Vietnamese communists can be considered an alliance of convenience, anymore than the links between Chinese nationalists and Vietnamese nationalists can be. They were natural ideological allies in the cold war world. .

"natural ideological" is a contradiction in terms.

The premise that Communism was some monolithic force that would overrride all other aspects of culture, history and geography was staggering naive, and one that  ironically gave undue credit to Communist ideology itself.  Certainly the Sino-Soviet split was open and notorious well before the US began escalation in Vietnam.  One also does not have to postulate any spurious ideologically-based attachment between the PRC and DRV to understand why China might deem it wise to provide the Vietnamese with the means to dent US influence and southeast Asia.  In fact, one need assume nothing but pure application of old-fashioned realist geopolitics.

By the same token, while a formal alliance between Ho and the US would have been inceivable, there was plenty of room for more informal arrangements that might have served the interests of both sides better than the course of action followed.  The current state of relations between the US and its old communist adversaries in Vietnam is instructive in that regard.

[Admiral Yi]

How about Thailand? Malaysia? Laos?

Ossum, meh, good.

[Eddie Teach]

Vietnam is probably the biggest source for the ones that are already here.

[CountDeMoney]

There was very little chance of Western Europe ever being taken over by communists. That's just your inner Joe McCarthy talking.

The domino theory that so brilliantly said the US must engage in Vietnam is only topped by the Soviet "let's invade Afghanistan" in its silliness as a theory for foreign policy.

The Dulles brothers never read Emmanual Todd.

Lulz, those two.  Never saw a Communist they couldn't invent.

[alfred russel]

Malthus, I'm aware of the war they fought, but the late 70s were dramatically different than the late 40s.

The rift in Chinese Vietnamese relations was brought about as part of the Sino-Soviet split which was in part due to a fracturing of ideological unity. The larger context was the fracturing of the communist block into a Soviet and (especially in Asia) Chinese sides.

The Sino Soviet split couldn't be exploited in the 40s and 50s because it still hadn't occurred. It couldn't be exploited for much of the 60s because it wasn't yet severe enough. For example, Vietnam got significant aid from both the USSR and China.

It made sense to work with the USSR in WWII--everyone understood we were fighting the greater evil, and we weren't supporting communism. When the communist world fractured in two, we began working with the Chinese block to isolate the Soviets (among other things).

In the 40s and 50s, communism was still generally united as a worldwide force. It was also in a quite nasty form, expansionary (including by military means), and countries around the world feared susceptible to its influence. We could not ally with the USSR for obvious reasons. We could not ally with China--we were actually fighting a major war against them in the early 50s. What would allying with Vietnam get us? They were strategically useless--we only really cared about them as a possible vehicle to spread communism across the region (which wasn't an especially important region anyway).

[alfred russel]

Well no. I don't think the alliance between Chinese communists and Vietnamese communists can be considered an alliance of convenience, anymore than the links between Chinese nationalists and Vietnamese nationalists can be. They were natural ideological allies in the cold war world.

The last time the Chinese came, they stayed a thousand years. The French are foreigners. They are weak. Colonialism is dying. The white man is finished in Asia. But if the Chinese stay now, they will never go. As for me, I prefer to sniff French shit for five years than to eat Chinese shit for the rest of my life.

He said that when the Chinese nationalists were in control of northern Vietnam. Not the communists.

[Admiral Yi]

What arrangement could NV and the US have come to other than throwing South Vietnam under the bus, and what could NV possibly have given to the US that would have justified the price?

China presented the upside of a significant counterweight to the USSR, and the only thing thrown under the bus was recognition of Taiwan.

[Tonitrus]

I believe the war could have been winnable had we invaded North Vietnam directly, but in that situation China surely would have directly intervened and nobody wanted to fight another Korean War.

Yeah, but if we had won in Korea as we should have, and crossed the 38th parallel and pushed those rice-eaters back to the Great Wall of China...then take the fucking wall apart brick by brick and nuke them back into the fucking stone age forever!!!



...then we might not have had to worry about Vietnam.   

[Ideologue]

Vietnam, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, etc.

No offense to funky monkey but Phillipinas just don't cut it.

Wrong.

[alfred russel]

"natural ideological" is a contradiction in terms.

The premise that Communism was some monolithic force that would overrride all other aspects of culture, history and geography was staggering naive, and one that  ironically gave undue credit to Communist ideology itself.  Certainly the Sino-Soviet split was open and notorious well before the US began escalation in Vietnam.  One also does not have to postulate any spurious ideologically-based attachment between the PRC and DRV to understand why China might deem it wise to provide the Vietnamese with the means to dent US influence and southeast Asia.  In fact, one need assume nothing but pure application of old-fashioned realist geopolitics.

My understanding is that after the Sino-Soviet split there was actually a pro-chinese faction in north vietnam. Obviously they lost out. But portraying Vietnam as a constant bastion of China phobia over thousands of years is way too simplicistic.

No the communist world wasn't ideologically identical, but there was a much greater tendancy for communists to aid other communists across borders. 

By the same token, while a formal alliance between Ho and the US would have been inceivable, there was plenty of room for more informal arrangements that might have served the interests of both sides better than the course of action followed.  The current state of relations between the US and its old communist adversaries in Vietnam is instructive in that regard.

No kidding. I mean, the Vietnam War was a train wreck for everyone, so that isn't saying much.

However, our old communist adversaries in Vietnam really aren't communist anymore. They gave up on that stuff when it wrecked them even worse than the war had.

[alfred russel]

What arrangement could NV and the US have come to other than throwing South Vietnam under the bus, and what could NV possibly have given to the US that would have justified the price?

China presented the upside of a significant counterweight to the USSR, and the only thing thrown under the bus was recognition of Taiwan.

I regret starting this thread. It was supposed to be a discussion of the Vietnam War, not whether we should have allied with Ho Chi Minh roughly two decades before the war ever got cranking.

[Admiral Yi]

I regret starting this thread. It was supposed to be a discussion of the Vietnam War, not whether we should have allied with Ho Chi Minh roughly two decades before the war ever got cranking.

Stop being so anal.  You start a thread, then it goes where it wants to go.