- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: We funded Ho Chi Minh before Vietnam, we funded bin Laden before 9/11
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:36 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:36 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
ok then you have to do all the countries of the Marshall Plan and Japan and a laundry list of other nations that turned out to be pretty fricking solid allies against the USSR throughout the majority of the Soviet Union'd existence and the 20th century
we live in an imperfect world that exists in shades of grey, but you guys are acting like this stuff was all super obvious when these decisions were made decades ago. sometimes these decisions worked out well. sometimes they didnt. you also arent considering the possibilities of what might have happened if we DIDNT fund some of those countries and individuals, because there's no way of knowing. could have been an even worse result. then again, maybe not.
ultimately, this is just pointless hand-wringing and self flagellation that isnt much different than liberal white women and their white guilt.
we live in an imperfect world that exists in shades of grey, but you guys are acting like this stuff was all super obvious when these decisions were made decades ago. sometimes these decisions worked out well. sometimes they didnt. you also arent considering the possibilities of what might have happened if we DIDNT fund some of those countries and individuals, because there's no way of knowing. could have been an even worse result. then again, maybe not.
ultimately, this is just pointless hand-wringing and self flagellation that isnt much different than liberal white women and their white guilt.
This post was edited on 3/12/25 at 8:42 am
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:36 am to OccamsStubble
quote:Jeez, if they have the power to install leaders and dictators in other countries than our own, it feels good that we have safeguards, curbs, and safety nets on our elections to insure fair elections, immune from fraud.
Now do Pinochet and Shah of Iran and Saddam Hussein and Manuel Noriega
Absolutely, without any doubt, we have the most secure, accurate and fair elections of anywhere in the world.
Right?
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:38 am to Heyes
quote:
Actually , Ho Chi Minh helped a downed American pilot shot down behind Japanese lines in French Indochina . 200 miles to safety later , Ho Chi Minh was asked what we could do to thank him . He responded with an autographed picture of General Claire Chennault who led the flying tigers , a pistol , and his nations freedom when WW2 was over . He was able to take these items back to his people and say “I am friends with the Americans and they promise our freedom “. When it was over Ho Chi Minh read the u s Declaration of Independence to his people . Then … France decided it wanted its colonies back , and the US had a choice to make. Live up to our word to this tiny man or give the country back to a big ally . We chose the ally and created an enemy in Ho Chi Minh .
I saw an American officer talking about the smugness of the French when they got off the plane in Vietnam as they were given back control of the country . He said” inside I wanted to kick their arse all the way back to Paris “
yes, here's someone who gets it.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:41 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
I’m not saying the Soviets weren’t a problem, but by the time their time in Afghanistan came up it was already the 80s, communism was failing, and we just wanted to rough them up as payback for Vietnam. It was petty and held no real strategic value to arm the mujahadeen
again, you are looking at this through the crystal clear eyes of hindsight. in the early 80s it was absolutely NOT clear that the USSR had less than a decade to live. them trying to keep up with Reagan in defense spending including, yes, spending money in Afghanistan, was a huge factor in their early demise.
saying that funding the mujahideen was petty and of no strategic value just simply isnt true.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:46 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
You are starting down the right path. Now hopefully you continue and realize we fund practically everything evil in the world, especially stuff that leads to military action.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:49 am to Heyes
quote:wow. Seems like we created the “communist” threat in Vietnam. Thanks for sharing. Doesn’t surprise me our foreign policy has been fricked since ‘45.
Actually , Ho Chi Minh helped a downed American pilot shot down behind Japanese lines in French Indochina . 200 miles to safety later , Ho Chi Minh was asked what we could do to thank him . He responded with an autographed picture of General Claire Chennault who led the flying tigers , a pistol , and his nations freedom when WW2 was over . He was able to take these items back to his people and say “I am friends with the Americans and they promise our freedom “. When it was over Ho Chi Minh read the u s Declaration of Independence to his people . Then … France decided it wanted its colonies back , and the US had a choice to make. Live up to our word to this tiny man or give the country back to a big ally . We chose the ally and created an enemy in Ho Chi Minh . I saw an American officer talking about the smugness of the French when they got off the plane in Vietnam as they were given back control of the country . He said” inside I wanted to kick their arse all the way back to Paris “
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:54 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
wow. Seems like we created the “communist” threat in Vietnam. Thanks for sharing. Doesn’t surprise me our foreign policy has been fricked since ‘45.
with your keen level of understanding and sharp analysis of foreign relations, i'm surprised you're posting here on a Wednesday morning and not serving in the State Department somewhere.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:55 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
We created the communist threat, and the "Democratic" opposition.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 8:57 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
With the amount of power consolidated in the US after WW2, it was inevitable that power would be abused on a global scale.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:03 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
It’s amazing how people don’t see the point in learning history and civics yet are baffled that the government would hide and support, plant puppet governments and it blows up in our face. Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, I know there’s more.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:06 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
OBL was funded by his own saudis. not us. we sent money through pakistani ISI and they funded afghan mujahideen to fight russians. AQ was not even created until last year of soviet-afghan war. AQ operatives even admitted they received zero funding from the USA. i have posted the link many times here.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:10 am to Fat Bastard
quote:
OBL was funded by his own saudis. not us. we sent money through pakistani ISI and they funded afghan mujahideen to fight russians. AQ was not even created until last year of soviet-afghan war. AQ operatives even admitted they received zero funding from the USA. i have posted the link many times here.
shhh, they're on a roll.
you are, of course, correct. that said, Pakistan and the ISI arent exactly staunch allies of the West, but whatever. Directorate S by Steve Coll is a great book on the topic.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:15 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
And now we’ve funded the cartel.
What am I missing? How and when did we fund the cartels? Who were the cartels supposed to be working against for the funding?
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:16 am to Sam Quint
quote:yeah that’s putting it mildly. Also, your friend said they didn’t get funding from America just the saudis. Well what’s the name of Americas biggest Islamic ally in the Middle East? Oh that’s right! Saudi frickin Arabia!!
Pakistan and the ISI arent exactly staunch allies of the West, but whatever.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:17 am to fwtex
quote:your missing a ton. We’ve funded different south/Central American cartels off and on for 40 years or more.
What am I missing? How and when did we fund the cartels? Who were the cartels supposed to be working against for the funding?
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:18 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
While the U.S. initially engaged with Ho Chi Minh and the Viet Minh against the Japanese during WWII, they ultimately did not support or fund him, instead prioritizing anti-communist forces in South Vietnam and later fighting against Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam during the war.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
Initial Engagement:
During World War II, the U.S. did cooperate with the Viet Minh, led by Ho Chi Minh, against the Japanese occupiers in French Indochina.
Post-War Shift:
However, after the war, the U.S. grew concerned about the spread of communism and shifted its focus to supporting anti-communist forces in South Vietnam, rather than the communist regime in North Vietnam led by Ho Chi Minh.
French Indochina:
The U.S. did not support Ho Chi Minh's goal of a unified, independent Vietnam, instead preferring a solution that would maintain French control and ultimately supported the French in their attempt to reclaim their colony.
US involvement:
The USA gave military aid to the French because it did not approve of Ho Chi Min's communist beliefs.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
Initial Engagement:
During World War II, the U.S. did cooperate with the Viet Minh, led by Ho Chi Minh, against the Japanese occupiers in French Indochina.
Post-War Shift:
However, after the war, the U.S. grew concerned about the spread of communism and shifted its focus to supporting anti-communist forces in South Vietnam, rather than the communist regime in North Vietnam led by Ho Chi Minh.
French Indochina:
The U.S. did not support Ho Chi Minh's goal of a unified, independent Vietnam, instead preferring a solution that would maintain French control and ultimately supported the French in their attempt to reclaim their colony.
US involvement:
The USA gave military aid to the French because it did not approve of Ho Chi Min's communist beliefs.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:20 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:23 am to Fat Bastard
quote:yeah no shite. You didn’t bring anything new to the table, you just posted government PC jargon that says what I’ve already said. We made him a promise and then went back on our word, in favor of the French. It was a cute cop out to blame communism. If we had stayed loyal to Ho Chi Minh and not given it back to France he never turns to the Soviets. And although china aided them during the war, they were historically enemies and they had their own war not long after America left. You aren’t smart for posting government propaganda you’re just a stooge.
While the U.S. initially engaged with Ho Chi Minh and the Viet Minh against the Japanese during WWII, they ultimately did not support or fund him, instead prioritizing anti-communist forces in South Vietnam and later fighting against Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam during the war.
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:25 am to Mushroom1968
quote:not really, we had our fingers in the Baath party as a whole because of Iran (aiding the monarchy), but Sadaam came to power on his own.
Am I remembering this wrong, or did we not put Sadaam Hussein in power?
He was made head of the security apparatus, which is a mistake often made. They knew he had been a Baathist revolutionary long before they gained power, was extremely ambitious, and had the tribal support to have staying power if he ever did use the security apparatus.
After the Baathists came back to power in '68 because he was head of security he basically became co-ruler with Al-Bakr. Then Al-Bakr got the retirement package of disappearing or lead.
That's why he purged the party soon after, there were still many many Al-Bakr friends in the party and since he didn't outright kill him they had to go. That cemented him as dictator with complete control of the Baath party with one-party rule.
This post was edited on 3/12/25 at 9:26 am
Posted on 3/12/25 at 9:27 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
We’ve been funding perpetual skirmishes and wars since the end of WW2. Made to not win but to never end. President Eisenhower warned about this in 1961.
I’ve talked to several USAF pilots that flew in the Vietnam war. They weren’t allowed to bomb real targets, but were ordered most of the time, to bomb empty fields and forests.
I’ve talked to several USAF pilots that flew in the Vietnam war. They weren’t allowed to bomb real targets, but were ordered most of the time, to bomb empty fields and forests.
Popular
Back to top



1






