UNCLE HO MURDERER,PART 2: WHY THE MURDERS

WHY THE MURDERS:

The rationale of the Communists for the execution was to create a
psychological shock to cure the peasants of their fear and respect for
the Landlord. Some peasants worked for generation for a landlord
family for whom they showed loyalty.
The Communists wanted to demonstrate to their base, i.e., the
landless peasants which formed about 90% of the Vietnamese population
in the 1950s that they are the bosses now. The land belong to them
and the Party will help them to keep it

Only then that the landless peasants who lived in fear of the
Landlords for tens of centuries believed that the Vietkong meant
business in their land redistribution promise. They enrolled in drove
in the Liberation Army and paid with their blood the Independence of
Vietnam. .(Note: some detractors accused the Communists of betraying
this promise but this will be object of another debate)

I strongly believed that without the agrarian reforms, without the
execution of a few thousands landlord, the Viet Minh program could not
gain the grass root support of the peasants to win against the French.
The Vietminh limited the execution to a minimum they deemed necessary
for the shock therapy.
No execution of landlords occurred in the South and none during the
US involvement (1957-1975) in the whole country because the Vietkong
was strongly supported by the peasants who doesn't need any more
proof to follow the Communists.

[Note:A similar situation emerged recently in Iraq where in spite of
the destruction of the Iraqi Army, the capture of 80 % of the Baathist
leadership but not of Saddam, the Iraqi people are still not
collaborating with us and giving us vital information to fight Saddam
Loyalists. Pentagon psychologists theorized these folks are afraid
that Saddam might come back.
A Vietkong-like solution would be to put victims of Saddam Hussein
in one of his numerous palaces and said to them: You are now the new
owners of the Palaces. We will help you to keep them and to show you
we mean business, we will execute a few Baathist members at the gate
of the palaces and expose their corpses on Palace ground then on TV
like the US did with Uday and Utsay Hussein's corpse. This might be a
shock therapy for these stupid Iraqi who did not know that they
already won]


I do not condone these execution by the Vietminh even if it affected
"only" a few thousands. I do not condone execution of Baathist
recalcitrants as part of shock therapy But then we have to be
careful when we talk about moral compass, Mr. Zeller.

EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE wrote:
>
> WHY THE MURDERS:
>
>
> I strongly believed that without the agrarian reforms, without the
> execution of a few thousands landlord, the Viet Minh program could not
> gain the grass root support of the peasants to win against the French.
> The Vietminh limited the execution to a minimum they deemed necessary
> for the shock therapy.

Er, the executions took place *after* the creation of the DRV with your
uncle as leader, so I don't think they needed the support of the
peasants against the French.

> No execution of landlords occurred in the South and none during the
> US involvement (1957-1975) in the whole country because the Vietkong
> was strongly supported by the peasants who doesn't need any more
> proof to follow the Communists.
>
No, the PAVN and the VC didn't confine their killing to landlords. They
were equal opportunity murderers. I don't think those thousands murdered
in Hue were landlords.

>
> I do not condone these execution by the Vietminh even if it affected
> "only" a few thousands. I do not condone execution of Baathist
> recalcitrants as part of shock therapy But then we have to be
> careful when we talk about moral compass, Mr. Zeller.

Empty words. Your defense of Ho is exactly like defending the Nazi
Concentration Camp commanders by saying they were good family men who
went to church regularly. It does not change the fact that they were
mass murderers. It does not change the fact that Ho was the head of the
DRV after 1955 during the mass murders. It does not change the fact that
even if he did not order the killings - tho he almost certainly did - he
did nothing to stop them. Guilty as charged.

You can bring up whatever red herrings you want to throw out, but your
continued defense of your uncle is a clear lack of moral fiber. No
amount of weasel words about it's necessity absolves him of his crimes.

Do you realize that statements that end in "but" completely eliminate
your moral credibility? You keep saying: "Yes, Ho's government engaged
in mass murder, but..." That keeps making the hole you've dug into your
morality all the deeper.

Al Zeller

Ahh please do not argue with El Chimpo! This butthole got his mind all
hooked up to the Communism theory like getting addicted to heroin.

If the US is doing the same thing to the Iraqis as the VietCong did to its
own people, which El Chimpo is proclaiming that it was a "correct" shock
treatment, then the US's mission will have no moral in it. Period.

This El Chimpo will kill to earn a "mass murderer" respect, like his idol
"Ho Chi Minh" before him. Asshole usually stinks. That's about all I can see
in El Chimpo.





"Al Zeller" wrote in message
news:3FAA969F.B21EEA15@nscl.msu.edu...
>
>
> EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE wrote:
> >
> > WHY THE MURDERS:
> >
> >
> > I strongly believed that without the agrarian reforms, without the
> > execution of a few thousands landlord, the Viet Minh program could not
> > gain the grass root support of the peasants to win against the French.
> > The Vietminh limited the execution to a minimum they deemed necessary
> > for the shock therapy.
>
> Er, the executions took place *after* the creation of the DRV with your
> uncle as leader, so I don't think they needed the support of the
> peasants against the French.
>
> > No execution of landlords occurred in the South and none during the
> > US involvement (1957-1975) in the whole country because the Vietkong
> > was strongly supported by the peasants who doesn't need any more
> > proof to follow the Communists.
> >
> No, the PAVN and the VC didn't confine their killing to landlords. They
> were equal opportunity murderers. I don't think those thousands murdered
> in Hue were landlords.
>
> >
> > I do not condone these execution by the Vietminh even if it affected
> > "only" a few thousands. I do not condone execution of Baathist
> > recalcitrants as part of shock therapy But then we have to be
> > careful when we talk about moral compass, Mr. Zeller.
>
> Empty words. Your defense of Ho is exactly like defending the Nazi
> Concentration Camp commanders by saying they were good family men who
> went to church regularly. It does not change the fact that they were
> mass murderers. It does not change the fact that Ho was the head of the
> DRV after 1955 during the mass murders. It does not change the fact that
> even if he did not order the killings - tho he almost certainly did - he
> did nothing to stop them. Guilty as charged.
>
> You can bring up whatever red herrings you want to throw out, but your
> continued defense of your uncle is a clear lack of moral fiber. No
> amount of weasel words about it's necessity absolves him of his crimes.
>
> Do you realize that statements that end in "but" completely eliminate
> your moral credibility? You keep saying: "Yes, Ho's government engaged
> in mass murder, but..." That keeps making the hole you've dug into your
> morality all the deeper.
>
> Al Zeller

nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in message news:<6ea9eed5.0311060618.907fc09@posting.google.com>...
> WHY THE MURDERS:
>
> The rationale of the Communists for the execution was to create a
> psychological shock to cure the peasants of their fear and respect for
> the Landlord. Some peasants worked for generation for a landlord
> family for whom they showed loyalty.
> The Communists wanted to demonstrate to their base, i.e., the
> landless peasants which formed about 90% of the Vietnamese population
> in the 1950s that they are the bosses now. The land belong to them
> and the Party will help them to keep it
>

NO peasant in any communist country was allowed to *keep* the land.
It's no different in Vietnam. The VCP only took the land from the
landlords *AND* the peasants and turned it into state asset to support
the war.

> Only then that the landless peasants who lived in fear of the
> Landlords for tens of centuries believed that the Vietkong meant
> business in their land redistribution promise. They enrolled in drove
> in the Liberation Army and paid with their blood the Independence of
> Vietnam. .(Note: some detractors accused the Communists of betraying
> this promise but this will be object of another debate)
>
> I strongly believed that without the agrarian reforms, without the
> execution of a few thousands landlord, the Viet Minh program could not
> gain the grass root support of the peasants to win against the French.

Mr. Zeller was correct to point out that the mass execution of the
landlords during '55-'57 had nothing to do with the "patriotic" war
against the French. Ho only did what Mao ordered to create the
communist's paradise.

But El's argument is not totally chicken shit (El's favorite
expression). El probably tried to defend Ho for the executions that
had occurred BEFORE the French was defeated during '45-'54. The
VietMinh did not have full control over the country pre-54, so I would
imagine less landlords were executed then.

I hate to be unfair to Uncle Ho. How about calling Ho
half-mass-murderer for the pre-54 period and full-mass-murderer for
from '54 on?

-- HPN

> The Vietminh limited the execution to a minimum they deemed necessary
> for the shock therapy.
> No execution of landlords occurred in the South and none during the
> US involvement (1957-1975) in the whole country because the Vietkong
> was strongly supported by the peasants who doesn't need any more
> proof to follow the Communists.
>
> [Note:A similar situation emerged recently in Iraq where in spite of
> the destruction of the Iraqi Army, the capture of 80 % of the Baathist
> leadership but not of Saddam, the Iraqi people are still not
> collaborating with us and giving us vital information to fight Saddam
> Loyalists. Pentagon psychologists theorized these folks are afraid
> that Saddam might come back.
> A Vietkong-like solution would be to put victims of Saddam Hussein
> in one of his numerous palaces and said to them: You are now the new
> owners of the Palaces. We will help you to keep them and to show you
> we mean business, we will execute a few Baathist members at the gate
> of the palaces and expose their corpses on Palace ground then on TV
> like the US did with Uday and Utsay Hussein's corpse. This might be a
> shock therapy for these stupid Iraqi who did not know that they
> already won]
>
>
> I do not condone these execution by the Vietminh even if it affected
> "only" a few thousands. I do not condone execution of Baathist
> recalcitrants as part of shock therapy But then we have to be
> careful when we talk about moral compass, Mr. Zeller.

"Hanh PN" wrote in message
news:aa448808.0311061237.3a0a1c0d@posting.google.c om...
> nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in
message news:<6ea9eed5.0311060618.907fc09@posting.google.com>...
> > WHY THE MURDERS:
>
> I hate to be unfair to Uncle Ho. How about calling Ho
> half-mass-murderer for the pre-54 period and full-mass-murderer for
> from '54 on?

I'm partial to half-ass-mass-murderer-in-denial.

Rita

"I've never killed anybody."
-Charles Manson

nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in message news:<6ea9eed5.0311060618.907fc09@posting.google.com>..

> WHY THE MURDERS:

It may be that you are merely ignorant.

If you'll review the following resources you will see why
civilized people find it impossible to justify and dismiss the many
murders committed by Vietnamese communists.

Viet Cong Atrocities:
http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...2390406001.pdf

Reeducation Camps:
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~sdenney...ion-Camps-1982

The Viet Cong Strategy of Terror:
http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...310402003a.pdf
http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...310402003b.pdf

Hanoi's Strategy of Terror:
http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...2310402004.pdf

Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com (Dai Uy) wrote in message news:<63323b03.0311062046.5a78f201@posting.google.com>...
> nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in message news:<6ea9eed5.0311060618.907fc09@posting.google.com>..
>
> > WHY THE MURDERS:
>
> It may be that you are merely ignorant.
>
> If you'll review the following resources you will see why
> civilized people find it impossible to justify and dismiss the many
> murders committed by Vietnamese communists.

How did this compare to the strategy of bombing North Vietnam and the
hamlet program executed by the other side, captain?.

I would have thought, for every mine laid by the VC, there is more
than a bomb dropped by the US planes North of the DMZ. You could argue
that those bombs are aimed at North Vietnam military targets and
civilian casualties were only collateral damages. Likewise, I could
claim that every mine laid by the VC was aimed to strike VNCH/US
convoy passed through the road and any civilian casualty was
collateral damage too.

The same for the hamlet program and the VC "terror" policy, both were
aimed to prevent the opposition the ground to rest, hide, resupply,
and attack at their convenients. The act of VC terrors against the
VNCH system would be similar to the act of burning down villages and
"other related activities" in order to force the people to move to the
hamlets.

In the war zone such as Vietnam was, I doubt you could accuse one
action for one side while really stand up and defend for the pretty
much similar action for the other.

Of course, it will come down to the simple explaination, i.e., for
them, they are all parts of a well coordinated campaign while for us,
such incidents were isolated incidents. I understood that like in any
business, there are many unwritten rules in any war so to prove
conclusively one way or another, would be a very difficult exercise.
So the question of who was right or wrong will effectively come down
to the question of which side, are you on?

We have gone through this circle again and again. Could we just leave
this problem to rest for all? Thank you.

Cao_Ky@beer.com (Tran Cao Ky) wrote in message news:...
> Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com (Dai Uy) wrote in message news:<63323b03.0311062046.5a78f201@posting.google.com>...
> > nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in message news:<6ea9eed5.0311060618.907fc09@posting.google.com>..
> >
> > > WHY THE MURDERS:
>
> I understood that like in any
> business, there are many unwritten rules in any war so to prove
> conclusively one way or another, would be a very difficult exercise.
> So the question of who was right or wrong will effectively come down
> to the question of which side, are you on?

One measure might be to consider refugee flow as an indicator of
which side posed, and poses, the least threat to the average
Vietnamese citizen.

How many Vietnamese chose to flee TO the communists -- either
before, or after their so-called liberation, from 1954 to today?

How many fled FROM that communist utopia TO freedom and
democracy?

Where are you posting from, and why?

>
> We have gone through this circle again and again. Could we just leave
> this problem to rest for all? Thank you.

Does it still bother you? The answer is very apparent. If
you'll be honest, and consider the questions above, it's very easy to
arrive at that answer.

Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com (Dai Uy) wrote in message news:<63323b03.0311071731.914a597@posting.google.com>...
> Cao_Ky@beer.com (Tran Cao Ky) wrote in message news:...
> > Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com (Dai Uy) wrote in message news:<63323b03.0311062046.5a78f201@posting.google.com>...
> One measure might be to consider refugee flow as an indicator of
> which side posed, and poses, the least threat to the average
> Vietnamese citizen.
There were about 800,000 refugees in 1954. I would not call those
800,000 refugees "average Vietnamese citizen" though and you know why.
Still that is the minority compared to the North Vietnam population at
the time. I understood that when Vietminh marched in to Hanoi in 1954,
the whole city erupted in celebration. Does this answer your question?

For the refugee flow the other way, why they need to move. The
agreement was to unify Vietnam after two years anyway and giving the
popular support of Vietminh by the AVERAGE VIETNAMESE, their winning
of the general election required by the Geneva agreement would be a
very sure thing in their minds.

> Where are you posting from, and why?
I know what you are coming from but I am not a refugee and actually is
thinking of moving back to Vietnam. Hope this answer your question.

> Does it still bother you? The answer is very apparent. If
> you'll be honest, and consider the questions above, it's very easy to
> arrive at that answer.
No, it does not. Looking at all available facts, I am very confident
where I stand on this issue.

Are we going through the same old tic-for-tac here? I have seen such
arguments and rebuttals many times before. Is there any new evidence
surfaced recently? If not, could we close this issue? Thank you.

Dai-Uy@hawaii.rr.com (Dai Uy) wrote in message news:<63323b03.0311062046.5a78f201@posting.google.com>...
> nguyen_viet_2000@yahoo.com (EL CHINO BOATMEN'S CONSCIENCE) wrote in message news:<6ea9eed5.0311060618.907fc09@posting.google.com>..
>
> > WHY THE MURDERS:
>
> It may be that you are merely ignorant.
>
> If you'll review the following resources you will see why
> civilized people find it impossible to justify and dismiss the many
> murders committed by Vietnamese communists.
>
> Viet Cong Atrocities:
> http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...2390406001.pdf
>
> Reeducation Camps:
> http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~sdenney...ion-Camps-1982
>
> The Viet Cong Strategy of Terror:
> http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...310402003a.pdf
> http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...310402003b.pdf
>
> Hanoi's Strategy of Terror:
> http://archive.vietnam.ttu.edu/star/...2310402004.pdf

Had you been at Mi't events such as at their 'bie^?u ti`nh' or 'da`n
cha`o' manifestations in the US, you'd notice how healthy looking they
are.
Most of the males there are former RE camps inmates!
Seeing is believing!
If you' re not brainless like the rest of them, you must change your
line of thought. Instead of VC barbary or cruelty, you must be
thinking more about VC generosity and humanity!