Uh Ho: Obama Says Vietnamese Dictator Inspired by Founding Fathers

Originally posted by neo96


Then why did they create another one during 1913 ?

History of central banking in US

Panic of 1907

The 1907 panic began with a stock manipulation scheme to corner the market in F. Augustus Heinze's United Copper Company.

Really interesting stuff. Should help answer your question.

reply to post by grey580

“These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America’s founding fathers.” — Ronald Regan while introducing the Mujahideen leaders to media on the White house lawns (1985).

That is classic, nearly fell off my chair laughing

Here is one of our queen meeting mr Assad, Blair even considered asking her to knight him...

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


But he wants you really mad that's the goal: Divide and Conquer.

He needs everyone really angry so we can all have a "civil" war and then we can have martial law and huge crack downs.

These comments he made (and usually makes) have no bearing on real issues that affect the nation, they are merely propaganda developed for the express purpose of mind control.

Everything he says either upsets his own followers against their opposition, or it enrages the opposition against him and his followers.

This isn't even about politics anymore as far as I am concerned, it's just a hate fest at this point, the entirety of politics.

reply to post by muzzleflash


So Government creating problems to offer 'new and improved solutions' is nothing new.

Kinda like the new and improved federal reserve brought to us by the current administration since it's power was once again massive expanded(Frand Dodd Act), and with the new and improved consumer protection bureau that controls the entire financial system in this country.

I have to digress here dictators, and 'democracy' have more in common for my taste just has a hipper rap tyranny by any other name is still tyranny.

Originally posted by Phoenix267
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Don't hate the player, hate the game. No, I understand what you're saying about him learning whatever he can and doing what he can to influence others. Even though no one is perfect, I'm skeptical if he was a dictator. That doesn't mean he was a great leader. I'll have to study about him and the Vietnam war.

Here's the commie connections....

wiki...

In 1923, Nguyễn (Ho) left Paris for Moscow, where he was employed by the Comintern, studied at the Communist University of the Toilers of the East,[14][15] and participated in the Fifth Comintern Congress in June 1924, before arriving in Canton (present-day Guangzhou), China, in November 1924.

The Communist International, abbreviated as Comintern and also known as the Third International (1919–1943), was an international communist organization initiated in Moscow during March 1919. The International intended to fight "by all available means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie and for the creation of an international Soviet republic as a transition stage to the complete abolition of the State."
Comintern

Ho was heavily backed by The USSR and Red China.

Big money involved.

Big exploitations.

reply to post by Phoenix267



Link

Ho finally settled in Paris in 1917. Here he read books by Karl Marx and other left-wing writers and eventually he became convened to communism. When in December, 1920 the French Communist Party was formed. Ho became one of its founder members.

reply to post by xuenchen


There's no doubt they backed him. Vietnam would be a perfect way to create more allies and also the ally was in East Asia near China, North Korea, and Soviet Union. Geography plays a huge role in politics and war.

I was just reading a related paragraph from a website about Vietnam War myths.

Myth: The domino theory was proved false.
The domino theory was accurate. The ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand stayed free of Communism because of the U.S. commitment to Vietnam. The Indonesians threw the Soviets out in 1966 because of America's commitment in Vietnam. Without that commitment, Communism would have swept all the way to the Malacca Straits that is south of Singapore and of great strategic importance to the free world. If you ask people who live in these countries that won the war in Vietnam, they have a different opinion from the American news media. The Vietnam War was the turning point for Communism.(Westmoreland papers)

Democracy Catching On - In the wake of the Cold War, democracies are flourishing, with 179 of the world's 192 sovereign states (93%) now electing their legislators, according to the Geneva-based Inter-Parliamentary Union. In the last decade, 69 nations have held multiparty elections for the first time in their histories. Three of the five newest democracies are former Soviet republics: Belarus (where elections were first held in November 1995), Armenia (July 1995) and Kyrgyzstan (February 1995). And two are in Africa: Tanzania (October 1995) and Guinea (June 1995). [Parade Magazine]

Source

reply to post by neo96


Take a look at this.
en.wikipedia.org...


Started by Carter. Expanded under Reagen.

On 3 July 1979, Carter signed a presidential finding authorizing funding for anticommunist guerrillas in Afghanistan.[2] Following the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in December Operation Storm-333 and installation of a more pro-Soviet president, Babrak Karmal, Carter announced, "The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan is the greatest threat to peace since the Second World War".[10]

President Reagan greatly expanded the program as part of the Reagan Doctrine of aiding anti-Soviet resistance movements abroad. To execute this policy, Reagan deployed CIA Special Activities Division paramilitary officers to equip the Mujihadeen forces against the Red Army. Although the CIA and Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson have received the most attention for their roles, the key architect of the strategy was Michael G. Vickers, a young CIA paramilitary officer working for Gust Avrakotos, the CIA's regional head who had a close relationship with Wilson. Vicker's strategy was to use a broad mix of weapons, tactics, logistics, along with training programs, to enhance the rebels' ability to fight a guerilla war against the Soviets.[11][12] Reagan's program assisted in ending the Soviet's occupation in Afghanistan.[13][14] A Pentagon senior official, Michael Pillsbury, successfully advocated providing Stinger missiles to the Afghan resistance, according to recent books and academic articles.[15]

The program relied heavily on the Pakistani President Mohammad Zia ul-Haq, who had a close relationship with Wilson. His Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was an intermediary for funds distribution, passing of weapons, military training and financial support to Afghan resistance groups.[16] Along with funding from similar programs from Britain's MI6 and SAS, Saudi Arabia, and the People's Republic of China,[17] the ISI armed and trained over 100,000 insurgents between 1978 and 1992[citation needed]. They encouraged the volunteers from the Arab states to join the Afghan resistance in its struggle against the Soviet troops based in Afghanistan.[16]

According to Peter Bergen, writing in Holy War, Inc., no Americans trained or had direct contact with the mujahideen.[18] The skittish CIA had fewer than 10 operatives in the region because it "feared it would be blamed, like in Guatemala".[19] Civilian personnel from the U.S. Department of State and the CIA frequently visited the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area during this time, and the US contributed generously to aiding Afghan refugees.

The U.S.-built Stinger antiaircraft missile, supplied to the mujahideen in very large numbers beginning in 1986, struck a decisive blow to the Soviet war effort as it allowed the lightly armed Afghans to effectively defend against Soviet helicopter landings in strategic areas. The Stingers were so renowned and deadly that, in the 1990s, the U.S. conducted a "buy-back" program to keep unused missiles from falling into the hands of anti-American terrorists. This program may have been covertly renewed following the U.S. intervention in Afghanistan in late 2001, out of fear that remaining Stingers could be used against U.S. forces in the country.[20]

With U.S. and other funding, the ISI armed and trained over 100,000 insurgents[citation needed]. On 20 July 1987, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from the country was announced pursuant to the negotiations that led to the Geneva Accords of 1988,[21] with the last Soviets leaving on 15 February 1989. Soviet forces suffered over 14,000 killed and missing, and over 50,000 wounded.

reply to post by grey580


Started by Carter, Expanded under Reagan,Expanded under Bush 1, Expanded by Clinton, Expanded by Bush 2, Expanded by Obama and the same countries other the other side of the world DOING THE SAME THING.

Why do people not want to accept that?

Who was helping HO Chi Min ?

Russia, and Co.

reply to post by Phoenix267

In North Vietnam during the 1950s, political opposition groups were suppressed; those publicly opposing the government were imprisoned in hard labor camps. Many middle-class, intellectual Northerners had been lured into speaking out against Ho's communist regime, and most of those who did were later imprisoned in gulags or executed; this became known as the Nhan Van-Giai Pham Affair. Some prisoners died of exhaustion, starvation, illness (often having received no medical attention), or assault by prison guards. Political scientist R.J. Rummel suggests a figure of 24,000 camp deaths during Ho's rule of North Vietnam between 1945 and 1956.[54]

That was just the begining.

Wiki

How does supporting the Vietnam War help your cause? Obama straight set all of you up.

Now by attacking him you are supporting the carnage of Vietnam, look at all the posts attempting to justify everything with links saying Vietnam saved the world from the commies and all this garbage.

McNamara admitted Tonkin didn't happen, that means there is no justification at all no matter what you claim. It means we are the real bad guys here and we should be ashamed for mixing treachery and lies with our American name.

I really wonder sometimes what the agenda is behind all of this stuff, I know most of you should by now know better than this but here we are committing the same fallacies that we were chewed out for time and time again. I definitely question the motives of all of this.

reply to post by MikeNice81


That's insane how this happens and it's lost to history.
Scary to think about this information.

reply to post by neo96


That it was expanded under all presidents wasn't my arguing point.

It was that all presidents support the wrong people.

Just as Obama is doing now in Syria.

IF Ho Chi Min was truly 'inspired' by the founding fathers why did he create a communist state?

And Have another communist state back him?

One of those things is not like the other.

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by neo96

 

That it was expanded under all presidents wasn't my arguing point.

It was that all presidents support the wrong people.

Just as Obama is doing now in Syria.

That is because those people haven't figured out the 'enemy of my enemy is still an enemy'.

reply to post by neo96


And they don't understand they aren't dealing with Americans.

It's a totally different mindset.

From what I learned in history class, this is actually true. However, we refused to help him because we were allied with the French colonialists. So, he was forced to get help from the Chinese and the Soviets.


Not saying he wasn't a communist but he asked for our recognition of Vietnam as an independent state first and we refused. So, the Soviets were really his only choice.

Originally posted by neo96
IF Ho Chi Min was truly 'inspired' by the founding fathers why did he create a communist state?

And Have another communist state back him?

One of those things is not like the other.

edit on 26-7-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Because ideology is nice but real world trumps it. He had to get rid of the French colonialists and we wouldn't help him because we were France's ally. Enemy of my enemy is my friend type of situation.

He was definitely a communist be we supported colonialism.

I think first the Chinese communists helped him and then eventually the Soviets.

We allied with Stalin in WW2 -- does that mean that we liked Stalin? No, he was just the enemy of the Nazis and the Japanese at the right time.

edit: wish I could delete posts? All this post could really do is start an argument and I don't want to do that.

reply to post by RedDragon

Because ideology is nice but real world trumps it. He had to get rid of the French colonialists and we wouldn't help him because we were France's ally. Enemy of my enemy is my friend type of situation. We allied with Stalin in WW2 -- does that mean that we liked Stalin? No, he was just the enemy of the Nazis at the right time.

So?

Did the US form a communist government?

NO.