In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Vietnam, Why Did We Go?

RevolutionJimRevolutionJim Member Posts: 594 ✭✭✭✭
There are books and articles that tell a different story than the given textbook "communist v anti-communist".

The Religious Beginnings of an Unholy War
The Shocking Story of the Catholic "Church's" Role in Starting the Vietnam War
By Avro Manhattan(1914-1990)

This book is more timely than ever. The Vatican-Washington Axis of the 50's is back again - and it's more sinister than ever. Rome still wants to use the U.S.military to make Russia Roman Catholic and bring about the fulfillment of Fatima.

With an immense collection of facts, photos, names and dates, Manhattan proves that the Vietnam War began as a religious conflict. He shows how America was manipulated into supporting Catholic oppression in Vietnam supposedly to fight communism.

Manhattan explains:
How religious pamphlets and radio broadcasts convinced one million Catholics to leave North Vietnam and live under Catholic rule in the South, overwhelming the Buddhists.
How brutal persecution of Vietnamese Buddhists led to rioting and suicides by fire in the streets.
Why the reports of what was really happening, written by American military and civil advisers, failed to reach the U.S. President.
Why the project backfired, and as U.S. soldiers continued to die, the Vatican made a secret deal with Ho Chi Minh.

History of the U.S. War in Vietnam
By Barry Romo, Pete Zastrow & Joe Miller

Former Emperor Bao Dai had appointed Ngo Dinh Diem, a Vietnamese Catholic who had lived in the U.S. and Europe, Premier of South Vietnam. Though Vietnam was 95% Buddhist, the Catholic Diem was soon recognized as the future leader of Vietnam by the CIA and other U.S. interests. In 1956 the U.S. refused to go along with the promised nation-wide elections because, in the words of President Eisenhower, "Possibly 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader rather than Chief of State Bao Dai.


  • RevolutionJimRevolutionJim Member Posts: 594 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Besides the religious leverage and motive for the war one of many financial incentives used to get all players on the field was oil.

    The Vietnam Standard Oil War

    The Rockefeller controlled Pentagon used the excuse of the war to drop bombs in the water and listen to the echo in order to locate the underwater oilfields.

    Herbert Hoover, later to become President of the United States did a study that showed that one of the world's largest oil fields ran along the coast of the South China Sea right off French Indo-China, now known as Vietnam. This was before offshore drilling had been invented and before a man named George Herbert Walker Bush was to become the CEO of a world-wide offshore drilling company.

    In 1945, Vietnam was still a colony of the French. Laurence Rockefeller, it appears, had given the extensive store of weapons to Ho Chi Minh with the hope that Vietnam would drive out the French so that Standard Oil would be able to take over the as yet undeveloped offshore fields. But in 1954, Vietnamese General Giap finally defeated and drove out the French at Dien Bien Phu with weaponry provided by the U.S. Ho Chi Minh reneged on the deal since he could read too, and he was well aware of the Hoover resource report and knew there was a vast supply of oil off the Vietnamese coast.

    In the 1950's a method of undersea oil exploration was perfected which used small explosions deep in the water and then recorded the sound echoes bouncing off the various layers of rock below. The surveyor could then determine the exact location of the arched salt domes which hold the accumulated oil beneath them. But if this method were used off the Vietnam coast on property Standard didn't own or have the rights to, the Vietnamese, the Chinese, the Japanese and probably even the French would quickly run to the United Nations and complain that America was stealing the oil, and that would shut down the operation.

    In 1964, after Vietnam was divided into North and South, and the contrived Gulf of Tonkin incident, several U.S. aircraft carriers were stationed offshore of Vietnam and the 'war' was started. Every day jet planes would take off from the carriers, bomb locations in North and South Vietnam, and then using normal military procedure when returning would dump their unsafe or unused bombs in the ocean before landing back on the carriers. Safe ordnance drop zones were designated for this purpose away from the carriers.

    Even close-up observers would only notice many small explosions occurring daily in the waters of the South China Sea and thought it was only part of the 'war.' The U.S. Navy carriers had begun Operation Linebacker One, and Standard Oil had begun its ten year oil survey of the seabed off of Vietnam. And the Vietnamese, Chinese and everybody else around, including the Americans, were none the wiser. The oil survey hardly cost Standard Oil a nickel, the U.S. taxpayers paid for it.
  • woodshermitwoodshermit Member Posts: 2,589
    edited November -1
    Disrespectful comment removed. Play politics in the political forum.
  • Smoky14Smoky14 Member Posts: 524 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It was a democrat conspiricy to get Carter elected, which leans to Hillery.[xx(]
  • woodshermitwoodshermit Member Posts: 2,589
    edited November -1
    Disrespectful? In your opinion. Remove the post rather than leave everyone who reads this thread with the idea that I have been "disrespectful" to anyone who served. Which I have not.

    He served, and your comment was disrespecful. I stated in the beginning that no ones service would be disrespected. End of argument.
  • machine gun moranmachine gun moran Member Posts: 5,198
    edited November -1
    RevolutionJim brings up a point that I had all but forgotten, about the many reasons for our VN involvement. I recall that at one time, John Kennedy told Standard Oil that if they wanted their Corporate interests in SE Asia protected, they would have to hire their own mercenaries. He seemed to be somewhat of a reluctant warrior on that. It was real early in the Johnson Presidency that the IX Corps units in the Ryukyus, including mine, got orders to paint white stars on all of their vehicles - aerial recognition signals, meaning a theater was about to open up and units were about to start moving.

    Whatever the politics were, we can guess at them all day long and possibly never be right, and not necessarily ever be wrong, either. One fact remains, and that is, that within a relatively short time in the 25 years prior to 1965, we used only a fraction of our military capabilities to clear the entire Pacific of the Imperial Japanese juggernaught. In 1965, virtually every senior Officer and senior NCO had experience in Europe or the Pacific, and in Korea as well, as well as did a lot of those of lower rank. My own assistant driver had won a Silver Star on Guadalcanal with the 1st Marine Div. And then, even given ten years to do it, we somehow couldn't militarily handle one small country that was hard put to manufacture its own bicycles. It has become my personal feeling that Corporate America was running the war, because even when the North lost the war during Tet, they still didn't - couldn't - lose. It amounted to a ten-year transfer of wealth, from taxpayers to Corporate contractors, which very callously also involved the transfer of 85,000 - not 55,000 - of our bravest, into body bags. Don't put a quarter in me on this one boys, you'll get 20 bucks worth.
Sign In or Register to comment.