SOUTH VIETNAMESE NAVAL EPICS REPOSTED WITH CLARIFICATION
 

(Note to explain El Chino's reference: To facilitate the brainless
Vietzan who are congenitally lazy to locate El Chino's claims, the
reference in parenthesis such as (p3l49)referred to page 3 of the
dokiem's article printout directly from the website.The Second number
is the line number reading from the top.)



A Zero KIA NAVAL EPICS

Killed in action or KIA was an acronym invented by the Pentagon to
describe a set of soldiers killed by enemy actions and not by
accidents, disease or friendly fires. The usefulness of this
terminology was , to el Chino, difficult to measure. Perhaps it was
intended to "demoralize" the Enemy , i.e., Hey ! You did not Kill as
many of us as You Think ! syndrome.

The Vietzankonghoa Navy whose best action till their fleeing out of
Vietnam in 1975 was the "evacuation" itself. It was credited with
evacuating thousands of South Vietnamese, most of whom Military
Personnel and their Family out of the grip of the Vietkong, not to
come back like the British at Dunkirk, but to deliver their human
cargo in the Philippines or to the Seventh fleet a few miles off the
coast of Vietnam.

But recently there was a cult of what was grandiosely described as the
New Vietnamese Bach Dang Victory (Bach Dang was the tributary of the
Red River where our National Hero Hung Dao defeated the Mongol Fleet
in the 13th Century), our own Tushima or Trafalgar. Victories do not
need to be real Victories on the battlefield if they were to bring
some heroic image of supreme sacrifices for example in my new country
the Victory of Davy Crockett at Alamo or of General Custer at Big Horn
killing and was killed by Mexicans and Indians, respectively. Nelson
died at Trafalgar, A fat Jap , whose name I forgot, died at Tushima.
El Chino , upon reading the Account by Naval Captain Do Kiem of the
VZKH Naval Epics at the Paracelses in 1974 tried to discover who was
the VZKH equivalent of Crockett, Custer or Nelson but failed to do so.
The Reason was in this Battle, there were no killed in action on the
South Vietnamese side.

Do Kiem mentioned there were two Puppet Soldiers killed by bullets
shot at their back (p3l24)so these two clearly qualified as
demoralized and run away under enemy fire or at the very least Awol .
They were following their leader a sub Lieutenant who brandished a
white flag(p3l20) even before any shot was fired to show their good
intention to "parley" peacefully with the Chicom.

The Third Puppet troop was killed by dehydration during his fleeing on
a raft(p5l2). So only a certain captain Thu or Tha could qualify as
, probably, the only KIA in this Epic Naval Battle. The probability
of his death was dead by friendly fire was due to the HQ 16 ,
another Ship of the Vietzan Navy was hit by friendly fire with an
ammunition clearly marked "Made In USA" according to Do Kiem(p4l47),
the one where Captain Tha was on , HQ 10 was presumably hit by a
Chinese Styx missile(p4l15) or a friendly Made USA ammo (p3l47) is
still unclear, at least to El Chino because the Styx was a big mother
like the French Exocet which sunk a British ship(HMS Sheffield) in the
glorious Falklands War with Argentina.
If the HQ 10 a 10 times smaller ship than the HMS Sheffield were
really it with a Styx, how on earth it can limp back to Nha Trang ?
(p430)
I wish Frank Ching, Carl Thayer and the Historians in SCV would read,
carefully, Do Kiem;s article to judge if the VZKH really defended
"Staunchly" Vietnam Territory like Ching and Thayer had claimed.

PS: By the way, Mr Buile, Do kiem was/is a high ranking VZKH officer
a naval captain equivalent to full colonel or brigadier general. He
had overall command of the Hoang Sa operation of the Vzkh navy. All 4
captain of 4 ships were his students( p3l49), not a Vietkong. El
Chino , contrary to buile's claim rarely used
Vietkong's source.

Note: To facilitate the brainless Vietzan who are congenitally lazy to
locate El Chino's claims, the reference in parenthesis such as (p3l49)
referred to page 3 of the dokiem's article printout directly from the
website.The Second number is the line number reading from the top.

Re: SOUTH VIETNAMESE NAVAL EPICS REPOSTED WITH CLARIFICATION
 

Mr Elchino nga`y to+'i to^'i cu+' ddo.c sa'ch heh heh. M/K co' tha(`ng
na`o vie^'t sa'ch ma` kho^ng the^m tha('t hay kho^ng?.Muo^'n bie^'t chie^.n
Hoa`ng Sa Mr Elchino ne^n ho?i tha(?ng nhu+~ng nguo+`i so^'ng co`n ra`ng
ra`ng ddo' heh heh. Cu+' Ho?i T/ta' San, Quynh, Thu+. , D/t Kie^~m heh heh.
Ra^'t tie^'c D/ta' Nga.c che^'t ru`i nhu+ng tui co' nhie^`u cho^? chi? cho
El nhie^`u nha^n chu+'ng so^'ng nu+~a. Mr. Elchino co' the^? ho?i Th/ta' An
, Th/ta' Ha?i la` tha^`y cu?a T/s Ha` ddi tre^n HQ10 la` xa. thu? 76.2 mm
ddang o+? Pha'p.DDa'm na`y co' wen bie^'t va` thi?nh thoa?ng nha^.u nhe.t
vo+'i tha^`n tuo+.ng cu?a Elchino la` ta'c gia? **To^~ Wo^'c nha(n
ra(ng*** thi` se~ ro~ ho+n heh heh.. Co`n 12 nha^n va^.t ddi ba(`ng be`
tro^i da.t ve^` Wi nho+n ` ho^`i ddo' co' 7 tru+. dduo+.c go+?i ve^`
Be^.nh xa' Ba.ch DDa(`ng tie^'p tu.c ddie^`u tri.(Tho+`i gian na`y tui
cu~ng dduo+.c ddie^`u tri. op+? dda^y) thi` co' ba'c si~ Qu'y , Ba'c si~
Chi sa(n so'c va` ddie^`u tri. lu'c B/s Tuye^'t la`m truo+?ng be^.nh xa'
thi` ta^'t ra ngay va` co' the^? pho^'i kie^?m dduo+.c de^? da`ng heh heh.
Kie^?m tra wan kho^ng tin ca^.y thi` nhu+~ng nguo+`i li'nh so^'ng so't
va^~n co`n heh heh. Rie^ng tui se~ kho^ng di'nh li'u va`o chie^.n na`y vi`
co' the^? bi. mang tie^'ng **Me`o khen me`o da`i dduo^i*** ne^n xin
ddu+'ng ngoa`i heh heh./.

"EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE" <nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com> wrote in
message news:6ea9eed5.0402191437.c6da173@posting.google.co m...
> (Note to explain El Chino's reference: To facilitate the brainless
> Vietzan who are congenitally lazy to locate El Chino's claims, the
> reference in parenthesis such as (p3l49)referred to page 3 of the
> dokiem's article printout directly from the website.The Second number
> is the line number reading from the top.)
>
>
>
> A Zero KIA NAVAL EPICS
>
> Killed in action or KIA was an acronym invented by the Pentagon to
> describe a set of soldiers killed by enemy actions and not by
> accidents, disease or friendly fires. The usefulness of this
> terminology was , to el Chino, difficult to measure. Perhaps it was
> intended to "demoralize" the Enemy , i.e., Hey ! You did not Kill as
> many of us as You Think ! syndrome.
>
> The Vietzankonghoa Navy whose best action till their fleeing out of
> Vietnam in 1975 was the "evacuation" itself. It was credited with
> evacuating thousands of South Vietnamese, most of whom Military
> Personnel and their Family out of the grip of the Vietkong, not to
> come back like the British at Dunkirk, but to deliver their human
> cargo in the Philippines or to the Seventh fleet a few miles off the
> coast of Vietnam.
>
> But recently there was a cult of what was grandiosely described as the
> New Vietnamese Bach Dang Victory (Bach Dang was the tributary of the
> Red River where our National Hero Hung Dao defeated the Mongol Fleet
> in the 13th Century), our own Tushima or Trafalgar. Victories do not
> need to be real Victories on the battlefield if they were to bring
> some heroic image of supreme sacrifices for example in my new country
> the Victory of Davy Crockett at Alamo or of General Custer at Big Horn
> killing and was killed by Mexicans and Indians, respectively. Nelson
> died at Trafalgar, A fat Jap , whose name I forgot, died at Tushima.
> El Chino , upon reading the Account by Naval Captain Do Kiem of the
> VZKH Naval Epics at the Paracelses in 1974 tried to discover who was
> the VZKH equivalent of Crockett, Custer or Nelson but failed to do so.
> The Reason was in this Battle, there were no killed in action on the
> South Vietnamese side.
>
> Do Kiem mentioned there were two Puppet Soldiers killed by bullets
> shot at their back (p3l24)so these two clearly qualified as
> demoralized and run away under enemy fire or at the very least Awol .
> They were following their leader a sub Lieutenant who brandished a
> white flag(p3l20) even before any shot was fired to show their good
> intention to "parley" peacefully with the Chicom.
>
> The Third Puppet troop was killed by dehydration during his fleeing on
> a raft(p5l2). So only a certain captain Thu or Tha could qualify as
> , probably, the only KIA in this Epic Naval Battle. The probability
> of his death was dead by friendly fire was due to the HQ 16 ,
> another Ship of the Vietzan Navy was hit by friendly fire with an
> ammunition clearly marked "Made In USA" according to Do Kiem(p4l47),
> the one where Captain Tha was on , HQ 10 was presumably hit by a
> Chinese Styx missile(p4l15) or a friendly Made USA ammo (p3l47) is
> still unclear, at least to El Chino because the Styx was a big mother
> like the French Exocet which sunk a British ship(HMS Sheffield) in the
> glorious Falklands War with Argentina.
> If the HQ 10 a 10 times smaller ship than the HMS Sheffield were
> really it with a Styx, how on earth it can limp back to Nha Trang ?
> (p430)
> I wish Frank Ching, Carl Thayer and the Historians in SCV would read,
> carefully, Do Kiem;s article to judge if the VZKH really defended
> "Staunchly" Vietnam Territory like Ching and Thayer had claimed.
>
> PS: By the way, Mr Buile, Do kiem was/is a high ranking VZKH officer
> a naval captain equivalent to full colonel or brigadier general. He
> had overall command of the Hoang Sa operation of the Vzkh navy. All 4
> captain of 4 ships were his students( p3l49), not a Vietkong. El
> Chino , contrary to buile's claim rarely used
> Vietkong's source.
>
> Note: To facilitate the brainless Vietzan who are congenitally lazy to
> locate El Chino's claims, the reference in parenthesis such as (p3l49)
> referred to page 3 of the dokiem's article printout directly from the
> website.The Second number is the line number reading from the top.

Re: SOUTH VIETNAMESE NAVAL EPICS REPOSTED WITH CLARIFICATION
 

hi all!

the website is here:

http://lichsuviet.cjb.net

please, go to "Ma^'t Hoa`ng Sa" section!

QTTT
-------------------
nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in message news:<6ea9eed5.0402191437.c6da173@posting.google.c om>...
> (Note to explain El Chino's reference: To facilitate the brainless
> Vietzan who are congenitally lazy to locate El Chino's claims, the
> reference in parenthesis such as (p3l49)referred to page 3 of the
> dokiem's article printout directly from the website.The Second number
> is the line number reading from the top.)
>
>
>
> A Zero KIA NAVAL EPICS
>
> Killed in action or KIA was an acronym invented by the Pentagon to
> describe a set of soldiers killed by enemy actions and not by
> accidents, disease or friendly fires. The usefulness of this
> terminology was , to el Chino, difficult to measure. Perhaps it was
> intended to "demoralize" the Enemy , i.e., Hey ! You did not Kill as
> many of us as You Think ! syndrome.
>
> The Vietzankonghoa Navy whose best action till their fleeing out of
> Vietnam in 1975 was the "evacuation" itself. It was credited with
> evacuating thousands of South Vietnamese, most of whom Military
> Personnel and their Family out of the grip of the Vietkong, not to
> come back like the British at Dunkirk, but to deliver their human
> cargo in the Philippines or to the Seventh fleet a few miles off the
> coast of Vietnam.
>
> But recently there was a cult of what was grandiosely described as the
> New Vietnamese Bach Dang Victory (Bach Dang was the tributary of the
> Red River where our National Hero Hung Dao defeated the Mongol Fleet
> in the 13th Century), our own Tushima or Trafalgar. Victories do not
> need to be real Victories on the battlefield if they were to bring
> some heroic image of supreme sacrifices for example in my new country
> the Victory of Davy Crockett at Alamo or of General Custer at Big Horn
> killing and was killed by Mexicans and Indians, respectively. Nelson
> died at Trafalgar, A fat Jap , whose name I forgot, died at Tushima.
> El Chino , upon reading the Account by Naval Captain Do Kiem of the
> VZKH Naval Epics at the Paracelses in 1974 tried to discover who was
> the VZKH equivalent of Crockett, Custer or Nelson but failed to do so.
> The Reason was in this Battle, there were no killed in action on the
> South Vietnamese side.
>
> Do Kiem mentioned there were two Puppet Soldiers killed by bullets
> shot at their back (p3l24)so these two clearly qualified as
> demoralized and run away under enemy fire or at the very least Awol .
> They were following their leader a sub Lieutenant who brandished a
> white flag(p3l20) even before any shot was fired to show their good
> intention to "parley" peacefully with the Chicom.
>
> The Third Puppet troop was killed by dehydration during his fleeing on
> a raft(p5l2). So only a certain captain Thu or Tha could qualify as
> , probably, the only KIA in this Epic Naval Battle. The probability
> of his death was dead by friendly fire was due to the HQ 16 ,
> another Ship of the Vietzan Navy was hit by friendly fire with an
> ammunition clearly marked "Made In USA" according to Do Kiem(p4l47),
> the one where Captain Tha was on , HQ 10 was presumably hit by a
> Chinese Styx missile(p4l15) or a friendly Made USA ammo (p3l47) is
> still unclear, at least to El Chino because the Styx was a big mother
> like the French Exocet which sunk a British ship(HMS Sheffield) in the
> glorious Falklands War with Argentina.
> If the HQ 10 a 10 times smaller ship than the HMS Sheffield were
> really it with a Styx, how on earth it can limp back to Nha Trang ?
> (p430)
> I wish Frank Ching, Carl Thayer and the Historians in SCV would read,
> carefully, Do Kiem;s article to judge if the VZKH really defended
> "Staunchly" Vietnam Territory like Ching and Thayer had claimed.
>
> PS: By the way, Mr Buile, Do kiem was/is a high ranking VZKH officer
> a naval captain equivalent to full colonel or brigadier general. He
> had overall command of the Hoang Sa operation of the Vzkh navy. All 4
> captain of 4 ships were his students( p3l49), not a Vietkong. El
> Chino , contrary to buile's claim rarely used
> Vietkong's source.
>
> Note: To facilitate the brainless Vietzan who are congenitally lazy to
> locate El Chino's claims, the reference in parenthesis such as (p3l49)
> referred to page 3 of the dokiem's article printout directly from the
> website.The Second number is the line number reading from the top.