Uh Ho: Obama Says Vietnamese Dictator Inspired by Founding Fathers

reply to post by muzzleflash


Is there something wrong now with calling Obama out as a jerk or a fool when, in specific examples, he has been a jerk or a fool?

What he said here about Uncle Ho and the Vietnam War was being an outright fool and showing his own ignorance of history. I don't give the man credit to know the history well enough for a remark like this to be cleverly crafted half truth by deliberate design. I really think he's got a 'skim' version and generally the parts HE likes of what history actually was in some areas of life.

I also cannot see in any way at all how this stupid statement furthered the cause of getting Americans turning against each other. Am I mad at anyone else? Nope.... I'm not even mad, per say, at Obama. That's silly, when it comes down to it...why be emotional about him? He's just a flat out fool in saying this and I CAN say I've read some FURIOUS vet's statements. Now that group he DID piss off deeply...and they have every right to BE pissed off at such a thoughtless statement.

It's kinda like this graphic I just found a short time ago....and it fits this thread SO well.




There are things to say and things not to say. Then there are WAYS to say things and ways you just DO NOT put it. Our President is informative to listen to at moments like this because it does speak to his limited knowledge of SO much we'd like to take for granted in a U.S. President knowing all about. The title doesn't bestow intelligence and he's proof of that on days like this.

Originally posted by neo96
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.

By communist, I assume you mean dictatorship or friendly to the Soviets and Chinese. Third world countries don't really get the luxury of help with no conditions.

Wikipedia
Following the August Revolution (1945) organized by the Viet Minh, Ho became Chairman of the Provisional Government (Premier of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) and issued a Proclamation of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.[27] Although he convinced Emperor Bao Dai to abdicate, his government was not recognized by any country. He repeatedly petitioned American President Harry S. Truman for support for Vietnamese independence,[28] citing the Atlantic Charter, but Truman never responded.[29]

reply to post by neo96

Well 3 branch's of government for starters, then there is that CONSTITUTION.

Things dictators don't like.

Really? Cause those 3 branches sure have no problems passing patriot acts, NDAA, on and on.... things dictators love. It's just an oligarchy, which is really what most "dictatorships" are.

Then why did they create another one during 1913 ?

If you read the link you would have seen that it was a charter, it was voted to not be renewed after it expired decades later. A 2nd central bank charter was created later on, and then finally the federal reserve.

Can't pin the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 on the Founders.

I never did. I pinned the FIRST central bank of the US on the founders, the one they created and signed into law. Stop deflecting.

How can women be property and own slaves?

Because non-slave women were above slaves on the social hierarchy..

reply to post by WaterBottle

Really? Cause those 3 branches sure have no problems passing patriot acts, NDAA, on and on.... things dictators love. It's just an oligarchy, which is really what most "dictatorships" are.

So that has nothing to do with the constitution, and everything about the men who pervert the constitution.

If you read the link you would have seen that it was a charter, it was voted to not be renewed after it expired decades later. A 2nd central bank charter was created later on, and then finally the federal reserve.

So what?

The 'First central bank' neither had the power nor wealth that it has today.

I never did. I pinned the FIRST central bank of the US on the founders, the one they created and signed into law. Stop deflecting.

Who brought up the Central Bank in the first place eh ?

Because women were above slaves on the social hierarchy... It would also depend on the women's marriage status and state she lived in. But this is off topic and I'm not going to give an essay on the history of women's rights in the US

Yeah it is off topic just like the Central Bank was brought up by who again?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I dont think he trolled vets. I think this is a way to publicaly say the USA was wrong to be there which is true and needs to be said for the sake of diplomacry and a way to gain abit of word wide credibility back (something the usa needs) there is little debate that the usa made a huge mistake a mistake bigger than Iraq, so best just to come clean admit it and move on rather than cling to it.

I think he choice of words were wrong very wrong though.

And first of all a apology should be made to vets who were sent to that hell hole with compensation for being missused in a war that the USA shouldnt have been in.

reply to post by crazyewok


Whether the US was wrong or not, in my view, is secondary. We don't hire a man to be President and lead this nation to make us feel crappy about it while yucking it up with foreign leaders in the process of making us feel that way. I recall when U.S. Leaders considered the public morale being high to be a GOOD thing, not a problem to immediately do something about.

Aside from that, if we want to get down to brass tacks on it? About a half million deaths are attributable to U.S. Forces between North and South Vietnamese during the war. (That's not counting South Viet Military action which may bring it to 1 million total) Upwards of 2.5 million civilians were killed AFTER 1975 and at the hands of the Hanoi regime. Flip a coin and pick which bad side you want to dump on or praise. Neither earned anything like praise or good words, IMO. Not at this level of things.

There are certainly times when saying nothing is the best move ...and this was one of them, IMO. Obama could have said anything relatively neutral or polite like all politicians do. Instead, he had to compare one of the more reviled figures to a fair % of America with some of the most respected people to an even larger % of Americans. BAD BAD judgement. Bad move on his part, IMO.

I wonder if Obama 'apologized' while he was at it ?

In secret of course, maybe a whisper in the ear ?

He's done it before we know.

Maybe future Americans will have to 'apologize' for Obama !!

Barack Obama's Top 10 Apologies: How the President Has Humiliated a Superpower (2009)

read the list and compare to today.

one of the great tragedies of war/politics was how the US, founded in rebellion from colonial overlords, should fail to support similar colonies after WWII as they sought freedom. I guess we'll always wonder if an outreach to Ho might have kept him from being a soviet puppet.
the French were miserable taskmasters. masses of Vietnamese fought, not 'for' communism, but for freedom/independence from France. shame they didn't have better leadership.
(rumor; in 1963 Castro was so fed up wi the Soviets he approached the US for negotiations; the Kennedys refused to believe it was for real and never followed up on.)

Ho might have quoted Washington but he sure didn't rule like him.

IIRC, Hitler quoted Jefferson in re 'if the people don't like the government they have the right and duty to abolish it and replace it.' just rhetoric to justify his power grab.

Anyone who knows history knows Ho Chi Minh was inspired by the founding fathers. He lived in the US and that is when he developed his ties to Korean nationalist who were also inspired in the US to throw off the colonial yoke. He quoted the U.S. Declaration of Independence when trying to convice Wilson to free Vietnam after WW1. After being ignored by the US he then turned to the Communist who gave him support. However the fact remains he was inspired by the founding fathers only later turning to the communists when the US decided to back a colonial power. At least Obama knows his history or should I say the person who prepped him did.

Originally posted by xuenchen
Good God....

Now Obama is highlighting the former dictator of Viet Nam in 'a good way ?' it seems

Read for yourselves, I will not comment other than Ho Chi Minh was a commie dictator.

Jesus Christ, doesn't Obama understand 'perception'

“...we discussed the fact that Ho Chi Minh was actually inspired by the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and the words of Thomas Jefferson.”

-- President Obama talking to reporters alongside Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang.

It may come as some unwelcome news to the families of the nearly 60,000 Americans who died in the Vietnam War that the whole thing was just a misunderstanding.

That was the impression President Obama gave on Thursday when he spoke to the press after his meeting with Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang. Sang brought Obama a copy of a letter sent to President Harry Truman from Ho Chi Minh in which the communist dictator spoke hopefully of cooperation with the United States.

Uh Ho: Obama Says Vietnamese Dictator Inspired by Founding Fathers

Is anybody else 'Proud' ?

Ho Chi Men was a very accepted figure leading up to WWII and after the war until knuckle head Truman viewed him as a threat. Kennedy knew better and almost withdrew all aid and troops from Vietnam. His, Kennedy, head accidentally exploded from a magic bullet and LBJ faked a provoked attack by the North. Boom, we went into debt and saved the Military Industrial Complex from losing its power. Didn't Ike say something about the military industrial complex before his passing of office?

reply to post by xuenchen


Historical context: Vietnam was under the rule of a colonial french government. After decades of being mistreated, socialist revolutionaries (namely the socialist-nationalist Viet Minh revolutionaries lead by Ho Chi Minh) kicked the French out of Vietnam following a series of decisive victories (namely the battle of Dien Bien Phu in which General Giap crushed the french and lead to the signing of the Geneva accords).
This really isn't too dissimilar to what happened in the USA.

Ho Chi Minh (referred to as 'Uncle Ho' in vietnam) gave the people what they wanted- a united Vietnam. Even Eisenhower at the time estimated that 80% of vietnamese wanted a communist government. That is not the work of an evil dictator, rather, a socialist president

Hate Unce Ho as much as you want
Hate Obama as much as you want-but

The facts are that -
Ho Chi Minh lived in the USA for a few years,and worked as a busboy
He asked and begged the USA to help him throw out the French

In a tragic twist of History we decided to help French colonialism at that cost us nearly 60000 dead American soldiers.
Our fathers,brothers,uncles who lost their lives and limbs were sent to SEA on a bill of goods that started with the French,and the icing on the cake was the fake Gulf of Tonkin event that we now know never happened.

For about a decade we fought,and helped cause about 4million Viet Namese casuaties.
Estimates say that the use of Agent Orange caused about 500,000 children to be born with birth defects.
We dropped about 2,236,000 TONS of bombs,or four times what was used in WW2.

The cost,per citizen of N and S Vietnam for the war has been estimated at 2 million dollars---per person.
I dare say you give any villager 2 million USD and they will go from being Commies to following Warren Buffet on Twitter overnight.

But someone(s) wanted a war.That damn near bankrupted us,split us apart,and killed and maimed tens of thousands of Americans.

.......And that someone was not Uncle Ho or the North.

Keep these things in mind and events such as Iraq,Afghanistan,and maybe soon Syria,Iran etc start to form a big picture of US military intervention around the globe.

The powers that be do not send the military for your or my benefit--they send them out for economic goals that transcend the mere cattle we are.The media goes out of its way to help create the emotional justification for military action-from Saddams troops yanking Kuwaiti babies out of incubators,to gay rights in Afghanistan.

The level of emotional control that the PTB and media have over us is very frightening indeed.

reply to post by grey580


The Mujahideen were freedom fighters then. They were fighting Soviet Communism back then. Somewhere along the way, Osama turned, or he got thrown to the wolves, not really sure which.
Reagan is entirely different from BObo. Reagan knew Communism was the enemy and Bobo, well different story. Bobo and Anita Dunn are quite the pair in glorifying communist dictators.

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Oh please President's do this crap all the time. It's called Diplomacy.

Here's Ronnie meeting with the Mujahideen

“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).

edit on 26-7-2013 by grey580 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-7-2013 by grey580 because: (no reason given)

I can sum up all the photos and slogans in one sentence,

Typical Patriarchal Circle Jerking to the Same ole Same ole Phallic Necrophilia Worship.

There.

Now What does any of that circle jerking have in common with the Founding Fathers? Well other than the Rule of PATRI, Fathers that is?

Politics, dickPlomacy is such BULLKAKI isn't it? Too bad it leaves a trail of destruction because IF if didn't,

Why it sure would make for some hilarious comedy.

reply to post by xuenchen
Your assessment of Obama's comments is so typical of brainwashed America. If you are aware of modern history then you'd know Obama is right. The fact is Ho Chi Minh was well schooled and admired America's success in it's declaration of independence. This is well known within certain circles particularity the academics community.
He was aware America severed ties with the king for "Self Determination" and for all bonuses the term implies.
Viet Nam prior to WW-II was a possession of the French Empire. France interest in rubber meant huge profits for Uniroyal tires and such. As in most cases corporate interests in a Empire rank supreme and little was done to "enrich" the quality of life of the inhabitants of south-east Asia.
During WW-II, Japan seized control of the region and forced them into slavery worse than the treatment of the French. After the war France returned to claim their possession and was met with massive resistance. The Vietnamese sensed the opportunity to break free of French intentions. Eventually this led to the worst battle in recent French memory. The shock of the battle of Dien Bien Phu, with the number of French soldiers captured, eroded French determination to pursue the issue for their will lacked as a result of still licking their wounds of WW-II.
America, err Wall St., saw the opportunity to lay claim to south-east Asia and add it to our own Empire...well...we all know where that brought us. However, the point is Viet Nam was in the midst of their civil war to determine their future without France and America.
We saw the same in Cuba after Castro's revolution that laid claim to Cuba's natural resources. Wall St. simply would not allow such a thing and we can see where that led to as well. If anyone is confused by what i said on the matter, I highly recommend you read Smedley Butler's book "War Is a Racket." For those unaware, General Smedley, the most decorated man in Marine Corp. history, stated he was tired being a hit man for Wall St. He also was the man who spoiled the big bank and Wall St. interests with their plan to topple the U.S. Govt. in a coup.
The ploy to characterize such men as communists and are a threat to America's apple pie, I will only suggest that if/when they became communists may have been the result of gross manipulations from Empiricists.

Ahh... ATS.. Nothing has changed in the years that I've been away... Some still denying ignorance.. Others.. Still denying the obvious,,,

coombs.anu.edu.au...

vimeo.com...

Any questions?

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)

Why does evey country have to follow the usa capalist system?

Yeah USA is capalist and you like it like that great. Doesnt mean a another country cant have another system.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Thats why I said he used the wrong words.

Really he should have been apoligising to the vets for the USA disgracefull misuse of its military as well as its terrible treatment of the Vets after they came home.

Something that occurred to me on this to mention. Folks don't have to argue and debate this like history is a confusing jumble of facts or something. Not with Vietnam anyway. The U.S. put together one of the most in-depth, accurate and authoratative reports in existence on what led up to, built and supported the Vietnam War. It was never meant to be seen by the public, which adds to the credibility. What report?

The Pentagon Papers.

As someone who has read what Ellsberg risked his life and freedom to get out to the public, I'll say it should be required reading for anyone on the topic. It's ANYTHING but complimentary in many aspects for U.S. Actions and does, as I recall, detail how we backstabbed Ho Chi Minh as if it were a sport we got points for. No White hats on either side for that crappy war or what led into it.

It's true Ho Chi Minh had, at one time, looked to be allied with the United States. Much like Fidel Castro's first stop after getting power was literally Washington D.C. in a physical trip he took to establish good relations ....to be told he didn't have an appointment, go home and call to make one. :shk: We really DO make our own enemies sometimes.

...Still though, by the time Uncle Ho was helping to put 58,000 Americans into a grave, the Founding Fathers were about the last thing he had any desire to emulate, much less show respect for. He'd turned East and embraced communism by that stage ...and whatever led to that happening? It makes talk about his previous respect for our Founders moot, IMO. Killing nearly 60,000 of our guys kinda does that every time.

Hence....Obama's talk was a Half Truth ...at best.

reply to post by xuenchen


I've seen documentaries on Ho Chi Minh, and the fact is, he did actually wish to emulate the United States, so much so, that he wrote letters to at least two different administrations (Truman and Kennedy, if I recall) seeking aid in removing the French (who were quite tyrannical, not to mention starving the Vietnamese population) from Vietnam. He never received a response, not even to say "No Thanks" or "Not Interested".

During his 'inaugural address', Minh quoted the Declaration of Independence in an attempt to display his interest in working with the U.S. government.

Minh spent a lot of time traveling abroad before he returned to Vietnam (He was in exile) to begin his revolution against the French, the place and government that he was most intrigued and enamored by, was the United States.

The only nation that would work with him was China, as the United States had entered into an agreement with France during WW2 in which, The United States agreed to not interfere with French Colonial interests (I.E. Vietnam).

As much as I do not agree with the President and loathe his stance on virtually every topic, He is not incorrect in this particular statement.

All in all, one could say that the Vietnam conflict (from the point of view of the United States), was one that was not only caused by the inaction of U.S. administrations, but was also exasperated greatly by them as well.

Just adding my 2¢ to the discussion.





Postscript: I would like to point out ahead of time that I do not agree with Socialism or Communism in any way, shape or form, but that doesn't mean that everyone involved with those systems of government are necessarily 'evil'.