- This topic has 5 voices and 9 replies.
-
Posts
-
? ? ? General Nguyen Vo Giap was born at An Xa, a small farming village in Quang Binh province, some 60 miles north of the old Imperial capital of Hue on the 1st of September 1910.? ? ? His father, an ardent nationalist, was well educated and although the family was poor, arranged for the young Nguyen to attend the Lyc?e School in Hue. This school was to produce many fine graduates who would play important roles in future events. These would include Ho Chi Minh, Pham Van Dong and Ngo Dinh Xiem. Giap however, would not graduate. He was expelled for political agitation in 1927, and three years later he was serving a prison sentence for organising a mass protest against French oppression. On release from gaol he attended the exclusive Lyc?e Albert Sarraut in Hanoi, and from there he obtained admission to the Hanoi University where he pursued his passion for history, specialising on the French Revolution and the campaigns of Napoleon.It was at this time that the young revolutionary would receive his introduction into Communism. His passion for a Vietnam free from the French Colonial rule would ensure that he would quickly rise through the party?s ranks, and by 1939 he and Pham van Dong (recently released from Polou Condore prison) would be leading the Indo-Chinese Democratic Front Movement within Vietnam. In May 1940 Giap and Dong escaped to China where they met with Ho Chi Minh, the acknowledged leader of the Vietnamese anti-French movement. Although Giap had never previously received any Military training he would during the next twelve months listen attentively to the many discussions about guerrilla warfare tactics given by visiting officers from Mao Tse-Tung?s Eighth Route Army.During the course of 1940 Giap began his first course for Military Cadres, and in 1941 he moved back to Vietnam where his small band of followers would now begin a series of raids on French outposts. Ironically his guerrilla band were armed with weapons supplied by both the Chinese Nationalists and the United States. As his guerrilla forces expanded Giap was able to obtain approval from the Party to proceed with the next part of his plan to obtain Vietnam?s independence from French colonial rule. On the 22 December 1944 he officially formed the first unit of his elite main force-the Chu Luc which would ultimately evolve into the Vietnamese Peoples? Liberation army (VPLA)From such beginnings would emerge a most outstanding Communist General who would command his countries military forces for more than forty years. Finally retiring at the age of 69 on the 7th of February 1980
Here is an interview with him from 1996; Interesting to see the war from the other sides viewpoint.The Dien Bien Phu campaign is a great and first victory of a feudal colonial nation, whose agricultural economy is backward, against the great imperialist capitalist which has a modern industry and a great army. Thus, it means a lot to us, to people all over the world, and to other countries. This is also how Ho Chi Minh saw it. http://web.archive.org/web/20081219105355/http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/11/interviews/giap/
“It was a war for the people by the people. FOR the people because the war's goals are the people's goals — goals such as independence, a unified country, and the happiness of its people…. And BY the people — well that means ordinary people — not just the army but all people. “ General Nguyen Vo Giap? ?
Regarding the final victory of the Vietcong in Vietnam wars, it seems that they started a new kind of warfare where battles din't only decide about the issue of the war but parallel battles were triggered at the same time: political, underground or resistance in enemy areas and guerrilla, sparkling a new way of fighting that could be extended to the Afghan resistance against the Soviet invasion and later, to the UN campaign in Afghanistan ??
Guerrilla warfare is as old as war itself. It has always been the preferred strategy of the weak because they can still achieve victory even if they are denied victory on the battlefield. See Alexanders campaign against the Bactrians for an early example of guerrilla warfare.
Meanwhile, under the command of Giap, both the French and the US were eventually driven out of Vietnam.
Either the French or Americans could have won in Vietnam. Vietnam was not a military conflict so much as a PR war. The insurgents got better PR in the home countries than the armies did. Giap did not win the war so much as hold on until the French and Americans gave up. However, a simplistic reading of the history would agree with you that both were driven out.
Either the French or Americans could have won in Vietnam. Vietnam was not a military conflict so much as a PR war. The insurgents got better PR in the home countries than the armies did. Giap did not win the war so much as hold on until the French and Americans gave up. However, a simplistic reading of the history would agree with you that both were driven out.
Vietnam was a proxy war we got embroiled in trying to hold back the spread of communist ideology. I say this because we were afraid to take the gloves off out of fear that our actions would serve only to unify the Soviets and Chinese against us. Because we only fought for the status quo (maintaining two Vietnams), we only garnered a partial retaliation from the Chinese who aided Ho Chi Minh without fully getting involved as they did in Korea. Korea probably had a lot to do with our strategies in Vietnam as well, that and the lack of support at home for escalation.
It was a proxy war to an extent but then, so was Korea depending on the interpretation you choose. Many historians claim most wars from 1945-1989 were proxy wars of one stripe or another. I have even heard claims that the trend continues today. I have to say that I call BS on the proxy war idea for the most part.
Either the French or Americans could have won in Vietnam. Vietnam was not a military conflict so much as a PR war. The insurgents got better PR in the home countries than the armies did. Giap did not win the war so much as hold on until the French and Americans gave up. However, a simplistic reading of the history would agree with you that both were driven out.
The French war was lost in Dien Bien Phu.The American war was lost in Washington.In both case, you can't deny it was a Vietnamese victory. Wars are not always won in battlefields.Is it a simplistic reading or these facts are not true ? Of course, there is a lot of explanations, analysis or excuses to explain this but facts are facts.
Vietnam was a proxy war we got embroiled in trying to hold back the spread of communist ideology. I say this because we were afraid to take the gloves off out of fear that our actions would serve only to unify the Soviets and Chinese against us. Because we only fought for the status quo (maintaining two Vietnams), we only garnered a partial retaliation from the Chinese who aided Ho Chi Minh without fully getting involved as they did in Korea. Korea probably had a lot to do with our strategies in Vietnam as well, that and the lack of support at home for escalation.
I'd say that Vietnam was more looking to Russia and received more from Russia than China.Due to the "eternal" conflicts between China and Vietnam, the Vietnamese were more trusting the Soviets than the Maoists. Several reasons for that:Ho Chi Minh was in France when he first met communism, historically a Russian politic government. That's where he became a communist advocate in order to get Vietnam independence from France.Vietnam and China history is a long list of wars and conflicts in any kind. A kind of cold hate.Moreover don't forget the 1979' Chinese-Vietnamese war, when Vietnam invaded Kampuchea and got rid of Pol Pot but China tried to invade Vietnam because of their agreements with the Khmer Rouge.
