NEWS: Tonkin: The Attack That Didn't Happen

The National Security Agency (NSA) released an article today confirming that an alleged attack on two destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin in August, 1964 did not occur. The article was originally published in an in-house journal and its public release was blocked for political reasons. The article states that the report of a second attack on the destroyers that then President Lyndon B. Johnson and his Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara used to support US intervention in the war in Vietnam was the result of faulty translations and selective presentation of intelligence. The President and the Secretary of Defense were unaware of the errors.



The Gulf of Tonkin incident has been questioned by many over the years and the release of this information is not likely to be what the current administration needs to bolster support for a war that many claim is the result of manipulated intelligence. Regardless of what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, the intervention of the US in the war in Vietnam was entirely justified by the first attack, the threat of global communist expansion and the obligations of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. I can't say that the war was properly prosecuted, but it was something our nation had to do under the circumstances of the time. The repercussions of today's announcement will reverberate for many years to come, I fear.

Related News Links:
seattlepi.nwsource.com
www.newsday.com
cleveland.com
Tonkin Gulf Intelligence "Skewed"


Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
The Gulf of Tonkin Incident: Is Iran Next?
ATS: NSA Study From 2001 Might Show Tonkin Resolution Falsified





[edit on 2005/12/1 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
The repercussions of today's announcement will reverberate for many years to come, I fear.

I am not sure about what you mention, GradyPhilpott.
This type information is known, but not widely known, since roughly 1999

If there were to be repercussions, they would have already reverberated back then, at least to me.

Furthermore, the NSA has been releasing such articles asserting such for quite sometime. The NSA even has a site dedicated to such, which has a 1995 copyright on it, meaning that such information may have been available as far back as 1995.
The Gulf of Tonkin Incident, 40 Years Later: Flawed Intelligence and the Decision for War in Vietnam






seekerof

[edit on 1-12-2005 by Seekerof]

Actually, I have been aware of inconsistencies in the story of the attacks of August 1964, since 1989. However, doubt and confirmation are two completely different things. Perhaps, you're correct. I hope so.

I have wondered for about 40 years if the truth would ever come out and now it has--mostly. Perhaps, in time, all the known information will be revealed, including that which is politically sensitive.

This has been a known tactic of the US Government ever since the Spanish-American War... and doubt it will ever change, sadly enough.

Some could argue the Iraq war is of the same breed... history doesn't repeat itself... it rhymes...

The first attack happened but few days later the second attack never happened. Somebody say that the sonar operator couldnt tell the difference between what was real or not on the sonar where many objects show up easily on the sonar. Either active or passive.

Originally posted by rmatrem
This has been a known tactic of the US Government ever since the Spanish-American War... and doubt it will ever change, sadly enough.

Some could argue the Iraq war is of the same breed... history doesn't repeat itself... it rhymes...

Actually, I would consider Iraq firing at Coalition jets patrolling the No-Fly Zone on a daily basis to be an act of war. I would consider Saddam's attempts at orchestrating the assassination of a former US President to be an act of war. Without rambling on and on, the point is that if you don't agree with the reasons the Administration used to justify war with Iraq, there are countless other adequate ones that more than justify military action in my book.

Unfortunately, there are some that are so opposed to this president and this war, that even if presented with a million justifiable and reasonable explanations, they would never be satisfied.

Good find Grady. Thanks.

I think the important thing here will remain important, and always be relevant:

Intelligence iformation is misrepresented to manipulate our Representatives, and to manipulate our thinking.

One question: Is this stuff defined as 'covert propaganda' or is it illegal by other terms? ...Sounds like a stupid question I know - I am just trying to figure out if it's indictable.

The USS Turner Joy is a 'floating museum' in my home town (Bremerton Washington) I wonder how this will affect its standing as some 'historical' ship now.

Originally posted by soficrow
Good find Grady. Thanks.

I think the important thing here will remain important, and always be relevant:

Intelligence iformation is misrepresented to manipulate our Representatives, and to manipulate our thinking.

Your point is no less valid Soficrow, but there was no intentional misrepresentation of intelligence in this case. The only thing shady that happened was that after the mistake was made no one had the guts to correct it.

Originally posted by Bootyac
The USS Turner Joy is a 'floating museum' in my home town (Bremerton Washington) I wonder how this will affect its standing as some 'historical' ship now.

It's still a United States Naval war vessel. I don't know what higher honor it could hold.