I served a tour of duty in Vietnam 1967-68. Most of us didn't want to be there. It was a matter of completing our tours of duty, and 365 days later, getting the hell out of that place, and going home. 58,300 + of us never came home alive. The hypocrisy was that politician's kids, fat cat's kids, upper middle class kid's never went to Vietnam. But they thought nothing of sending us poor slobs to Vietnam, some of us to die in Vietnam. Everything in Vietnam was about survival. If a zip or a dink came after me with an AK-47, I killed the son of a bitch before he killed me of one of my buddies. That's the bottom line. Don't believe the crap the politicians spew out about they died to save democracy. No one in their right mind wants to die. The real reason is that we fought like hell was for each other. We didn't give a damn about some political or ideological bullshit.

@DoowopLover

4 жыл бұрын

@ Why did I join the Army ? I was 20 years old, young, naive, and patriotic at the time. Even if I hadn't enlisted, I would have been drafted anyway. I didn't deliberately kill innocent people. I did kill enemy soldiers though. In this situation, you don't have a choice. It's literally kill or be killed. I have seen the ravages of warfare. I have seen people die. I've seen what war does to people. I hate war. What I hate most is those who are always beating the war drums, perfectly willing to send someone off to war in some godforsaken place, as long as their cowardly asses are safe and secure at home. What is shown on the news is censored and sanitized. If most people saw what ground combat does to human beings, up close and personal, they would vomit. Deep down inside, I'm still angry about the way we were treated when we came home from Vietnam. I don't normally think about this consciously, because I have a life to live, but I will always hate the people who did this to us. The Russian people did the same to the Russian veterans who served in Afghanistan. I have plenty of empathy and compassion for those Russian veterans, because I understand how they feel.

@buddysilver5788

4 жыл бұрын

All you needed was a SPUR on your HEEL and a DOCTOR'S NOTE! Trump got one 5 Times!

@dm2781632

4 жыл бұрын

DoowopLover 1946 Your on the money mate, I also served and all we are left with is anger.

@100consciouseternallightho6

4 жыл бұрын

@@dm2781632 Learn something new. Don't be angry. There is a solution. Read what I wrote to DoowopLover. Anger is what makes you sick. Let it go. Nobody died. Everybody left their bodies. Quantum physics has proven this dimension/reality is literally a dream.

@DoowopLover

4 жыл бұрын

@@buddysilver5788 Agreed....there were plenty of people back then who had phony medical deferments, joined the National Guard or the reserves, left for Canada, etc. They basically "took the easy way out" and the true reason is they had cowardly yellow streaks running down their backs. And now they "talk tough", but talk is cheap, and actions speak louder than words. There is an adage: A courageous person will die one death, but a coward will die a thousand deaths.

What upsets me is when our guys finally got home they were treated horribly. They need retribution

Friedman emphasizes "credibility" for the U.S. He ignores the fact that the U.S. government lost credibility with the American people because of the Vietnam War.

@dragonfly1929

4 жыл бұрын

HE IS PART PROPAGANDA,PART BYAS HUNGARIAN JEW!!

@staatsfeindlich9939

4 жыл бұрын

@@dragonfly1929 anti semites belong in the same category as imperialists

@staatsfeindlich9939

4 жыл бұрын

But mostly with the rest of the world

@genestone4951

5 ай бұрын

​@@dragonfly1929you are 100% correct!

@verysimple01

3 ай бұрын

Thanks to British propaganda...

Dude! Wake up! My father was in WWI and came away with the saying "The bayonet is a weapon that has a worker on each end." He also mentioned the soldiers knew that decisions to go to war are made in "boardrooms" and not "congressional room!" Has anything changed?I was a helicopter pilot in Vietnam and saw the exact thing happening yet again.

And killed at least 3 million Vietnamese fight for their freedom from the French 🤔

I guess 50 years after the fact you can make up any theories and present them with credibility, no matter how convoluted.

@jb-vb8un

9 ай бұрын

note the CT / JFK nutball cottage industry 60 years

I listened for a couple of minutes to Mr Friedman then stopped. The proposition that the US committed its aggression in Vietnam (and the others of southeast Asia) to preserve the credibility of our claim to be the defender of Europe from the USSR is sheer claptrap. No one expected the US to attack the nation that defeated France. Certainly France did not, and the French were not pleased to see the US trying to replace France as the colonial master of its former colony. De Gaulle was, of course, correct in advocating for Europe to be its own defender, as Europeans today realize as they struggle to survive this winter's cold while paying 4X to the US what their NG costs were for Russian gas. Germany, especially, has suffered a catastrophic blow to its industry from the present cost of energy - a self-inflicted blow resulting from their suicidal obedience to the EU's President Ursula von der Leyen and the demands for sanctions against Russia by the US. Back to Vietnam: The US first introduced our armed forces into Vietnam when Pres Kennedy committed the US Air Force to the napalming of villages to end the support for the Viet Cong from the peasants. Our USAF used airplanes with Vietnam's insignia. Kennedy did this as a new President to continue Eisenhower's rejection of the international accords reached in Geneva by the victors of Diem Bein Phu over the French in 1954. The new President's effort to show strength really showed his weakness as a leader. With LBJ, similar domestic political considerations were stronger than his leadership, and he expanded the war many fold. No, Mr Friedman, your argument is false. We did not kill millions of southeast Asians and sacrifice more than 50,000 Americans to impress the Europeans with our credibility. Our Presidents did so to win elections in the US. They were immoral and weak and have become more so since. We, Americans, now are paying increasingly for our miguided presidential choices.

@poco1174

Жыл бұрын

Subjective prattle laced with historical inaccuracies gathered from anti-American journalists prattle. So much nonsense I simply don’t have the time to respond point by point. Not good I know, but this is where we are with the history of The Vietnam war. It reminds me of Tucker Carlson’s analysis of the war in Ukraine. Russia attacks a neighbor who was absolutely no threat to them. NATO or no NATO. Carlson deems the UKs as the threat. But it is Zelenskyy who is the thug. Your assessment of the U.S. as the aggressor in VN is the same lame mindless analysis. I know you can’t explain VN in one paragraph just like I can’t counter your nonsense in one. You use way too much loaded language.

@Slo-ryde

Жыл бұрын

imo….Degaul duped the US into entering into VN, using reverse psychology by putting US credibility into question…they hoped that the US would do the job they couldn’t do ( even though the US paid for much of the French war effort in VN), and hope to salvage some if not most of their colonial possessions, whose resources they were using to rebuild post war France back to a major world power. JFK may have perhaps suspected this and did not go into VN head first… but with the Cold War looming large; he could not fully ignore it. LBJ got fooled completely and went in fully… the Brits were not at all fooled by Degaul, and stayed out, much to the dismay of the US!.. but they also had other reasons not to engage there. To be fair to LBJ, he did make efforts to arrive at a peace agreement towards the end of his term but Nixon ( as president elect) secretly undermined it, and it fell through!…the odd thing is that Nixon could have negotiated a similar agreement with NVN in his first term that he did in his second term-but chose not to do so, maybe looking for better leverage, but it backfired because the US public was fed up!

He is just an apologist for the US. The Vietnam war as a war of nationalism - the Vietnamese were fighting for their unity. The Americans were trying to prevent that. You just can't fight nationalism

@StephenZ827

4 жыл бұрын

you ever have someone break into your home...and when the police show up... you claim the police were interfering with a burglar just trying to make a living....The South did want unity, as did the French...just not under communist rule, meaning China rule.

I lived through that period and I served in that war. Although the views of our European allies MAY have been a factor in our decisions to go into Vietnam, there's very little proof that such was a major consideration. America was STILL in the throws of the anti-Communism hysteria of the 1950's. In the early 1960's "everybody and their brother" thought our involvement in the Vietnam war was NECESSARY to stop Communism in South-East Asia. THAT. from what I saw, was the driving force for our involvement there, FAR above any other consideration.

@cindyavalos6200

Жыл бұрын

And yet here we are a few decades later full blown communist…get vaxed or fired, get vaxed or can’t sit in a restaurant, digital one world currency, “we will own nothing and be happy” as our countries new motto, as so on and so forth. This WEF agenda was in play since the 50s so I doubt they were actually fighting communism and more like another weak country we could conquer just like we did with the natives. Oh yeah we totally came to help the native…that’s why we slaughtered them in their sleep and killed all the buffalo to starve them. They lie to the soldiers and generals and everyone because you and I are not part of the elite that want to create the New World Order. Wake up, this was a complete elite war not anyone else’s

@badguy5554

Жыл бұрын

@@cindyavalos6200 That MAY have been the case for Iraq...but it was not the case for Vietnam. In war innocent people get killed. The North Vietnamese and their Vietcong "forward troops" were murderers and we stopped them. But the very people (the Democrats and RINO's) who sold out the South Vietnamese are selling out the American people today. They are the Deep State elites you speak of.

@angkhoanguyen6114

10 ай бұрын

@@badguy5554 You said we (NVA&VC) are murderers, then you (USA) are invaders and killers. You said you won most of the battles, but that are meaningles if you lost the war. And We Vietnamese did what we always does for thousands of years, fighting the sovereignty and independence of our homeland successfully.

Behind his soft voice, Friedman is actually a viciously biased individual. Never once does he mention the Korean War where the US got badly beaten at Choisin by the Chinese army. That episode instilled a deep fear of Chinese intervention in Vietnam in the minds of the US government at the time. Blaming De Gaulle for the Vietnam war proves Friedman’s seriously lack of courage or honesty.

@malcolmmarzo2461

4 жыл бұрын

RG: Interesting observation about Korea creating a Chinese fear. To bad we didn't realize the Vietnamese were even tougher. They prided themselves on a history of defeating Chinese invaders. But our stupid leaders (except for a couple of intelligent American and French generals) thought the Vietnamese were just a bunch of little brown people. I soon learned to respect the Vietnamese when I met them in a vicious jungle war.

I served in US ARMY, Vietnam 1969-1971 & traveled extensively incountry. He’s good on current affairs but not this. Quit listening at 2:44.

The biggest truth about the Vietnam War is the USA licked the dust in the end and 55000 US Soldiers lost their lives in the War. The USA used all illegal bombs against civilians (Napalm Bomb etc) and killed 2 million Vietnamese and another 1+ million Cambodians. But in the end lost and left South VIetnam !

My dad was their and he gone to a base so he can help he never talks about it and know he died at 2019/05/16. I miss him.

@sonjak8265

4 жыл бұрын

Please accept my condolences.

Mr Friedman is wrong. There has never been any documentary evidence or recorded claim by a high level official of the US government to substantiate the thesis that the US began military operations (under JFK) in Vietnam in order to impress our European allies. Mr Friedman does not present any or refer to any. This is solely his opinion. The concern of the US government, according to most analysts I have read, was in Asia, not in Europe. The US was greatly concerned that Indonesia not fall into communist influence. The then prevailing domino theory had it that were Vietnam to fall to a communist rule, so would the other "dominoes" of southeast Asia. By proximity, Indonesia would be the final prize. This is a far more believable scenario particularly because the US looked upon the defeat of the Nationalists by Mao Zedong's CPP, the "loss" of China, as a humiliating defeat for the US - as it was - and a repetition in Indonesia was an intolerable thought. Friedman is not an historian or even an analyst I can take seriously on this issue.

@OutnBacker

5 жыл бұрын

Yup. Those pesky shipping lanes...

@skippy5712

4 жыл бұрын

It was the opposite. Europe would have nothing to do with it. Europe disagreed completely.

interesting that he says the political class is us the citizens... I would argue that the people who own the media and the super rich can and do manipulate democracy.

Time and distance have given me a deep respect for the intelligence and resilience of the people of Viet Nam. I have friends who served there that have returned to visit after many years. To a man, they all conveyed their respect for the people there who received them warmly and respectfully. Their culture is ancient and refined compared to the power and profit-driven vacuity of American pop culture. We never learn from our mistakes.

@Spartacus547

2 жыл бұрын

You'll find that most people do not find nobility in living in poverty, as far as American pop culture and greed being ingrained in our culture that was not true before Vietnam, that started in the late 80s with the dismantle of the manufacturing base of are country, if you can only see the flaws of our history you will never see its achievements

biggest US mistake was just after ww2 when they did not support Ho Chi Minh in his independence attempt from the french uncle Ho did look out for support from the US before he searched support from the russians and chinese against the french

@juschu67

5 жыл бұрын

www.pri.org/stories/2017-09-18/little-known-story-vietnamese-communist-leader-ho-chi-minh-s-admiration-us

George Friedman is absolutely the best. I would love it to see him as real political decision maker. I would support George for congress. I believe he would be such a great decision maker.

I supported and worked for Lyndon Johnson's campaign in 1964 as a 14 year old. Johnson ran as a peace candidate, then renigged on that when the South Vietnamese were at the point of collapse in early 1965. I opposed the war beginning in October, 1965 and participated in anti war demonstrations and worked with Draft Resistance Seattle. Unfortunately, North Vietnam was a determined enemy and Johnson/McNamara were unable to defeat them. This led to a war of attrition which Americans didn't like. We might be killing ten North Vietnamese for every American killed, but as one American politican said, "Americans don't care about the ten North Vietnamese killed, they care about the one American killed." Nixon's shock and awe bombing of Hanoi was the ticket to settling the North Vietnamese and getting the United Staqtes out. In 1975, when the North Vietnamese launched a conventional invasion of South Vietnam, the Democratic Congress, for good or ill, refused to allow the United States to intevene again or provide sufficient arms to South Vietnam, leading to a North Vietnamese vgictory. That has led the Vietnamese Communist government to be an ally of the UNITED STATES. The Vietnam War properly sank Lyndon Johnson and Democratic candidate for President Hubert Humphrey in 1968, and elected Richard Nixon. Johnson and McNamara were fools.

THANK YOU

Very interesting to listen to. I did not know about the credibility factor in the decision making process.

@donaldclifford5763

6 жыл бұрын

I thought it was a policy of containment, a too slow incremental escalation, domestic politics, and Nixon's resignation. I never considered credibility with NATO.

@roanhielkema5714

6 жыл бұрын

Credibility has been a major factor since halfway through the Eisenhower administration, aka, part of the Eisenhower doctrine.

@donaldclifford5763

6 жыл бұрын

It just seems Vietnam was just so much a side show, and a bit of a quagmire.

@donaldclifford5763

6 жыл бұрын

oneviwatara: I see you abandoned all logic before posting.

@donaldclifford5763

6 жыл бұрын

oneviwatara: You not only parked all logic at the door, you abandoned all sense of decency. You stink.

This comes from the guy who wrote the book "the coming war with Japan". I'm still waiting..

@HondoTrailside

5 жыл бұрын

He is still pitching it.

Thank you!

I may have missed it, but he never mentioned SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization). Under the treaty, the United States was obligated to provide supplies, equipment and training to the legally recognized government of South Vietnam. LBJ wanted full involvement of the military/industrial complex.

As someone who WAS THERE . . . I can discribe the entire war, with just "3" words . . . POLITIC'S GONE INSANE. Can't make it any clearer than THAT !. . . .

@buddysilver5788

4 жыл бұрын

58,000 Americans died for the Pope of Rome, in Vietnam!

I found this man's perspective on the beginning of America's involvement in Vietnam fascinating. Very insightful & well articulated. However, when he got to the end of the discussion and stated the the ruling political class in the U.S. is the voters, I found that to be very naive. The entire process of selecting which loser D is going to run against loser R is out of the peoples influence. It is a popularity contest and a sham. Until 'we' start taking third party candidates more seriously or better yet elect a leader that then has to form a coalition government, we will always be puppets of the two party system.

I believe that De Gaulle wanted France to be separate from NATO, and wanted France to have it's own independent offensive nuclear arsenal, but I don't believe France was interested in forming military alliances with any other countries. I also don't believe the North Vietnamese or the Viet Cong were very interested in permanently becoming part of the Soviet Bloc or forming alliances with the Chinese beyond getting the military and diplomatic aid they needed to fight their own war for their own nationalistic reasons.

I think this is absurd. We had 200,000 soldiers in Germany at that time. If Charles Degaulle said the Americans won’t come he would be right because the Americans were already there. We had three armored divisions and 2 mechanized infantry divisions. What were we going to do, abandon 1000 main battle tanks to the Russians? It ridiculous.

@Jay-vr9ir

Жыл бұрын

When Russia went into Hungary in 56 ,the U.S. did nothing.

@sleeplessvirus

Жыл бұрын

@@Jay-vr9ir did Hungary ask them ti do something? Was there a legal justification to enter Hungary? It’s is not the same thing as our treaties with nato.

@123rocker0071987

9 ай бұрын

Absolute crap! Did the commie germans ever attacked the capitalist germans? No ! on the contrary they got united. then wht was the imptce of the US guarantee to the germans against the russians....this guy is a nut case who wants to underline his importance and nothing else.

The Suez crisis was when the French stopped thinking that they could always rely on the US for common interests. It's mainly why the French developed their own nuclear weapons.

We had the air power to win the Vietnam war, Gen Le May head of SAC said he could win the war in 10 days but was denied permission to send in his bombers. Later on Nixon ordered the bombing of Vietnam and after 11 days and nights of bombing the North said they wanted to talk peace.

@nancyelliot8411

4 жыл бұрын

Our geopolitics is criminal. Period. Same time US was murdering 4 million Viets, we were destroying common wealth in a dozen places- the evil that was nazism we kept up re Iran etc. And the liars now fill the goddam books. I found out William Shirer (RiseFall3rd reich) was a cia operator, a storyteller who bs'ed the world about WW2 (he blamed German ppl for nazism when it was pigmoney -see prescott bush- and fascism of ruling class that made hitler election ww2 possible... the fake Apollo moon nonsense was going on while vietnam was butchered (not to mention Manson family crimes which was at same time as Apollo 11! Humanity is in trouble if stupidity is US!

@geezerhull

4 жыл бұрын

Good lord.

@SandfordSmythe

2 жыл бұрын

General Lemay like to sit in the base non-smoking movie theater and smoke a big cigar. Shows you his principles.

In McNamara's "Fog of War" you can see and hear his evident regret at his complicity in the things he was told to do

@charlesmartino4252

5 жыл бұрын

You have to wonder in some ways if McNamara after JFK's assassination was afraid that America was going to look confused and weakened. Thus his willingness to over compensating and putting us on a collision course with History.

Did he mention that Wietnam War started mainly due to corruption of South Wietnam Govermant, who consisted mainly of Roman Catholics, was opressing lower classes consisting mainly of Buddists, leading to finally peasant uprising, which North Wietnam has used "to help opressed classes". The peasant from the South Vietnam were also opressed by the government secret police, and USA has done nothing to stop it, thought USA authorities were well informed. Vietnam War could be avoided, if USA shook South Vietnam govermant and force them to give buddist majority some slack. If this had been done, the Vietcong infiltrators would have very little or null success in converting peasants to their cause. But it is convinient to blame others, for example De Gaulle.

How ironic that France would say the US would not fight for Europe. France in WW2 would not fight even for itself.

@cosmicmariner6621

4 жыл бұрын

I like your quote. It is poignant, but not correct. The French had better and more tanks yet suffered badly. It's like shaming a Sumo Wrestler for being killed by a 12 yr. old with a shotgun. The French lost thousand trying to hold back the Nazi's for 3 days during Dunkirk -no one ever makes a movie about that! Unlike today the French were never in danger of being "Ethnically Cleansned."

@Ren-kei

4 жыл бұрын

@@cosmicmariner6621 They Fought hard and had some of the best weapon designs at the time, but did poorly, Germans had the strongest air force at the time, and Frances tanks alone couldn't save them. they held off very well. but their lines were broken and it ended up being a straight line chase all the way to Paris, if only they had the aid they were promised. lots of brave soldiers died Saying they didn't fight to protect their country is bigotry.

Had me almost convinced until he said that the political class in America is the voters. XD

@jamesmurphy9105

4 жыл бұрын

My thoughts to

@mr.barkyvonschnauzer1710

3 жыл бұрын

If voters were not the political class then Trump would had never won the presidency in 2016.

@geedoubleu641

3 жыл бұрын

@@mr.barkyvonschnauzer1710 Don't be ridiculous.

LBJ famously said, "I will not be the first president to lose a war.". 58,000 american and 1 million southeast asians lives later, it was still a lost war.

Well my American brothers how are you feeling repeating Vietnam in Ukraine?

@yossarianmnichols9641

9 ай бұрын

Its your Vietnam bitch

@justincase8532

9 ай бұрын

@@yossarianmnichols9641 No cunt, its a US war by proxy that keeps the military machine in the US going without sacrificing any US troops. Lets see how this cowardly strategy plays out for the US.

I don't like to say this but he is what? Revisionist nonsense blabbermouth. He is completely ignorant about Geopolitics.

I was drafted in 1969 by democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson. I was 19, did not know/care about politics, I was in pure survival mode. As a soldier for the next 30 years, I learned to never trust a politician. Republican democrat all the same. A politician NEVER has a military person's six!

5:15 - 4:40 I've been taught that The Cuban Missile Crisis was ended by quietly removing the nukes that NATO had put near the USSR border in Turkey, which the Soviet missiles in Cuba were simply a response to. Dr. Friedman, please correct me.

@understandyourrhetoric6955

6 жыл бұрын

Look at the nuclear stockpiles at the time of the crisis. The U.S. supply was 9 times the amount of the Russian military and better delivery systems. The weapons in Turkey were coming out anyway so Kennedy gave them a bone. Russia blinked, thank god.

@AdstarAPAD

6 жыл бұрын

The USA still has Nukes stored in Turkey.. It seems that the rumour you heard was simply a face saving exercise for the USSR

@chavdarnaidenov2661

6 жыл бұрын

These are bombs, those were missiles. The US installment of nuke missiles in Turkey was mortally dangerous to the Soviet Union because of the proximity. The Soviet counter- reacted symmetrically, by placing missiles in Cuba. The US leadership tried a game of chicken with the threat of nuclear Doomsday. When that didn't work, it backed down.

@kingharryannis

6 жыл бұрын

Read free ebook "Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution", by Antony Sutton. Communism is a tool of Monopoly Capitalism. Castro was a CIA/CFR/Rockefeller agent.Barry Seal flew guns ,ammo ,supplies to Castro and his rebels in1958.William Morgan a sheep dipped CIA operator trained and commanded Castros Rebels winning the battle of Santa Clara. Che took the credit ,William was executed wiped from history.The Jew Bankers are playing everyone like puppets.Cuban missile crisis seems to be FAKE.Research for your self.

@barahng

6 жыл бұрын

Infidel Atheist "Monopoly capitalism" is like saying jumbo shrimp. When there is no competition and monopolies (that are typically enforced by the state), there isn't really capitalism. The free market does not exist without competition. Having no competition, you end up at the same problem as having state run enterprises. In practice, every industry being controlled by one state sponsored company is no different from the state directly owning everything like a socialist system. If anything its worse as it insidiously masquerades as "free market".

The containment strategy originated from George Kennan, but Kennan himself said that his idea did not require going to war in Vietnam. The correct strategy would have been to help Vietnam to implement the Geneva Accords, but otherwise to get out. Even General Macarthur said the place to draw the line was between SE Asia and the Philippines.

50,000 lives for political B.S. why were these politicians not convicted of war crimes...50,000 lives not to mention the death and destruction of that country... Politicians look at people as the expendables... 50,000 lives..💀 😫...

This may have been a small part of the reasons that we went down that long path to the war. For a full, I believe, for a good understanding of the the entire process reading "Best and Brightest" by David Halberstam and "Secrets" by Danial Ellsberg. In my view, if you are interested in the U.S. involvement in Viet Nam these are must reads

Talking about Vietnam War or American War, there are a lot of controversies till these days. However, there were 3 key turning points that could prevent so much bloodshed between both sides. First of all, studying about the Ho Chi Minh letter which had sent to President Harry Truman in 1946. In that letter, President Ho would want to make an alliance with the USA for re-constructing Vietnam after WW2 (in WW2 Viet Minh was helping American get rid of the Japanese Imperial) and preventing the French colonial’s re-invasion, but the American kept in silence. Secondly, after the French’s defeat at Dien Bien Phu 1954, both Communist and Capitalist forces should not divide Vietnam into half (because the divided country is always against the Vietnamese wish in general or President Ho Chi Minh in personal, Ho Chi Minh is nationalist rather than capitalist or communist, he only picked the side in order to help his people out or slavery). So, at this time American politicians again made alliance with a wrong side (South Vietnam). If there were no ideal of capitalism or communism’s involvement, Vietnam would become an independent country already and may follow the Western countries. But American was so afraid of the domino’s affect, they were wrong at beginning and they kept it wrong once again. If American learned so well about Vietnamese history, they would know 3000 years the Vietnamese and the Chinese would never be a good alliance. Because the Vietnamese would do anything to defend the country and stay out of Chinese’s domination. The North Vietnam only borrowed the military support to fight the USA, and they made sure they used it well. However, by comparison to the Southern Vietnamese they were more dependable to American supports. That why, so much resources had been wasted, and the South people was no willing to win the war. Mistake by mistake, the USA politicians were so afraid of losing face that pushed them deeper into the shit hole. Thirdly, the attack of Tolkin Gulf was totally made of fake, which triggered 11 further years of meaningless bloodshed for both sides. After all in 1973, American decided to withdraw military and resources out of the South leaving behind the whole failing campaigns, which they could be have as strategic alliance in South East Asia Region from beginning after WW2. As a result, in the end neither capitalism nor communism had won. It was the will of the people would want to be independent from Colonial and Imperial Force, no longer being slavery. The lessons of Vietnam War is the ultimate lesson of studying your enemy, and choosing the right partner. Nowadays, Vietnam’s politic still follow Communism in order to maintain the stability, but their Economic totally toward Capitalism (free trade). In diplomacy, Vietnam chooses to be neutral and ready to cooperate with any friends. And the most important thing is the will of every Vietnamese always exists the patriotism against from foreign force of domination, even the Chinese or whomever.

I am beginning to think this guy just makes shit up, the USSR wasn't helping North Vietnam till after Khrushchev's removal in 1965, we had been there already over 5years. So his excuse of proving to Europe we were with them seems invalid. After all it was the French who lost Vietnam to Japan during WWII, after we defeated Japan the French decided they would try to take it back. Ho Chi Minh was American educated, once Japan was defeated he look to Unite Vietnam as it own Sovereign Country called the Republic of Vietnam, he used much of the verbiage of the American Constitution in his efforts to create that Republic. Then when he talks about Johnson he leaves out completely the fact that Johnson stopped the bombing in 1968 and started peace talks, those talks yielded the North agreeing to start a peace process.A peace process that would never take place because Nixon sent an messenger to the South stating he would get the South a better deal, because of that the South refused to come to the table. It would be Nixon who totally mismanaged the war by expanding it into Cambodia, then once he opened that Pandora's box he understood that we could actually lose in Vietnam. With the fear of being the 1st American President to lose a war he created the urgency to start peace talks.Those talks were a total fraud as Nixon was only looking for any kind of deal that would let him save face. He and Kissinger knew fully the Blood Bath that would ensue once we were gone, there are even tapes of them speaking about it.

Do you mean that McNamara did not know that Kennedy had promised to remove our missiles in Turkey, later, in return for Russia's removal of missiles in Cuba, first? Does Friedman not realize that the interception of the Soviet ship was merely a charade to cover up the real deal?

i never understood what this man is smiling about.

@warchannel9190

6 жыл бұрын

Martin Makella how life is fucked up iguess and people brainwashed stupid questions

@MrCamel254

6 жыл бұрын

That man is the chief of NAFTOR, a privatized intelligence agency which supplies the american government with crucial geopolitical/strategic information (in exchange for money of course) while having the freedom to act completely outside of governmental juristiction or supervision. Much like blackwater security shooting their way through iraq if you remember. He is a war profeteer. He is smiling because death and carnage fills his pockets. He will keep smiling and flaunt his sociopathic views because nobody will ever be able to bring him to justice. Welcome to the free world my friend ;)

@michaelmullins3396

6 жыл бұрын

He is smiling because he loves war and like all neocons profit from it, that simple.

@fezzamanezza8415

5 жыл бұрын

@@MrCamel254 youre a fucking moron

I always thought that the Vietnam war was about making Federal Reserve notes the currency of settlement throughout Asia.

@jerryrobinson5163

4 жыл бұрын

It was for only making Heroin the currency of the world. Please people get your heads out of your asses and hear the truth. Lucifer is laughing at us on a daily basis because we are so easily duped. My dog and cat are smarter than most people because they smell shit for what It is.

In light of the present conflict in Ukraine, I'm even more convinced that Friedman is talking even more crap that I would have thought before the Ukrainian conflict.

This is precisely what Larry Eagleburger said to my college roommate's father (a CIA operative at the time) in Yugoslavia in 1966.

i like george friedman. i hope dod advisors are listening to his coming conflict with japan work as platform to study asia geopolitics stability history and strategic - defense and security/intel policy at home (rear area security) and abroad. i try to follow a lot of his work and others.

@therockfordfiles2247

6 жыл бұрын

Kori Jenkins the book is compelling. it basically states that japan imports most of its industrial resources mainly from u.s. so future necessity for japan to secure independent resources will bring future tension. also japan is hemmed from reconstruction its own navy due to post ww2 treaties. plus south china sea issue north korea vietnam conflict philippines and communism plus philipines and hacking the boxer rebellion china etc. all are factors in asia geopolitics therefore must be looked at as a whole not just individual events to understand. it basically states that book overview and even name is meant to prevent conflict by stimulating discussion over the issue geopolitically b4 things come to a head last minute. consequently its rumored much of our rear area civil strife is agitated by communist east since 60s 70s protest era to include inner city epidemic opioid crisis eastern oligarchy russia hacking trolling border incursion etc

@donaldclifford5763

6 жыл бұрын

Michael Bailey: Wow. What a thesis. George Soros must pay you well.

Friedman contradicts himself. "The Europeans criticized us for going in, but if we didn't do it, they would have panicked."

At the time the US made the commitment that morphed into the Vietnam War, 1954-1956, Charles de Gaul was a private citizen. He would not re-enter government until 1958. De Gaul's questioning of the Anglo-American relationship with Western Europe would not present itself until his veto of British membership in the Common Market in 1962.

LBJ wacked JFK.

“The charm of American politics is that everyone changes their mind” Say that to the victims of your wars of terror.

Very good insight. Europe has drawn us into so many wars. This was the fear of our founders. On Robert McNamara he is spot on.

Hey, Friedman. The comments column straightens out your story to be more believable. You speak for the big guys in political speak. The little guy already knows the score. It's know use proving you wrong, there's no nothing to be gained from it.

@philbeattie3978

4 жыл бұрын

This dude makes about as much sense as my pet parrot.

France lost their version of the Indochina War and pulled out. LBJ/McNamara and the MIC took it over from them after JFK was murdered.

@seadogslug233

5 жыл бұрын

And the reason JFK was murdered was to keep the war going so the OIL would keep flowing. I saw pictures of U.S. oil tankers over there 24/7 leaving LOW in water(full). No wonder they didn't want to win.

It would have been VERY CONVENIENT for the USA to have a third major ally in Southeast Asia ( i.e., Vietnam, South Korea & Japan), in the event of a future war with China. An advantageous location to place more missiles, American military bases, etc. America seeks to preserve its globally dominant position and fought the Vietnam war for ITSELF! Yes it may also have had some minor secondary benefits.

@cardinalRG

Жыл бұрын

_”America seeks to preserve its globally dominant position and fought the Vietnam war for ITSELF!”_ For any of the superpowers involved, the Vietnam war was not about the well-being of the Vietnamese themselves. It was a proxy battle in the global cold war, and the US, China, USSR, _et al_ were only too happy to exploit internecine conflict among the inhabitants of Vietnam for their own purposes.

Much of what the speaker says makes sense despite omitting discussion of what Nixon did during the 1968 election to scuttle the peace talks then underway. He instructed his aides to communicate with the S. Vietnamese embassy in DC and to tell them that he, Nixon, would negotiate a supposedly better deal for them. The S Vietnamese then dragged their feet in the Paris peace talks, undermining Nixon's Dem rival for the presidency Humphrey. Just in the last two years the notes of the call in which Nixon gave that instruction were discovered in the Nixon Library in California. As a result of Nixon's intervention [a virtually certain violation of the Logan Act that forbids private citizens from interfering with formal US diplomacy] US combat involvement continued until 1973, with most US war dead suffered during Nixon's administration. He should have been prosecuted for extending the war.

He's wrong. We had a Southeast Nation Treaty. Australia was a member and sent troops to join us in Vietnam. We should have blockaded all communist ports taking in USSR military aid. We didn't out of false hopes for "detente" with the Soviets. No US troops, but blockades.

Vietnam was an extension of the Korean war, another reason was another foothold, especially in Southeast Asia. SEATO was another organization that US created and funded, before all that... (1945)US supported the French financially to recolonized French Indochina.

Captain John J. Herrick who was aboard USS Maddox during the gulf of tokin incident knows what really happened, watch his interview (were he said the attack was false lol)

@SandfordSmythe

7 ай бұрын

Gulf of Tonkin [ or equivalent] was just the first thing to be checked off before going to war.

i think the easiest way to answer this question is ask who got any money at the end of it. That's the only way a dumbass like me could try work it out. Correct me if im wrong but i think the oil contracts in the south china sea after the war got split 50/50 US / Russia. That kind of underpins the reasons why the US airforce was not allowed to bomb the NVA/enemies anti aircraft fire while they were being set up. In fear of getting the Russians involved as they would have been the suppliers and probably may have been on the ground helping the installations.This also may explain why he Russians were there.Its impossible to imagine that the US Govt spent billlions on CREDIBILITY, THATS GARBAGE. Secondly how many bombs were actually dropped on land versus dumped into the sea. Those detonations could have been used as a source to find and scope for the oil locations. So that was a genius thing if they did that cause the private contactors had the taxpayer fund that service, stroke of genius there.BUT This is only my view it could be completely wrong. Im no political scientist but for Fxxk sake i cant help use a bit of common sense to put 2 and 2 together and work things backward.Coincidently i was having a pie a few weeks back and the other bloke next to me starting chatting. He was ex navy of 25 years and i asked him what did the bloody aussies get for their troubles in vietnarm. He said oh they got East Timor. So if was the architect of this war i would have initiated this plan. Initiate gulf of Tonkin , that way i can get legal jurisdiction to international waters where im not supposd to be, then start locating the oil reserves, then when they go to tender im the only one that knows where they are cause i just spent 10 years searching/oh illegally mind you but not if im at war. Get the taxpayer to pay for it by bribing afew corrupt staffers, then do a deal with the Russians to prevent WW3 and give them half. Fxxk sounds like SYRIA. But im just guessing here and mucking about with a laughable scenario but who knows ??? i welcome other proposals but please no mice IQ reasons like stopping the spread of communism leave that for the 6 yr olds.

Now, how does Kissinger's sabotage of Johnson's peace talks factor into this scenario.

Interesting. Did we go to war in Korea for the same reason?

@traditionalfood367

5 жыл бұрын

Why was MacArthur held back by D.C. (which was restrained by the UN) from winning the Korean War when it was within US military capability to do so? It's been suggested that the PRC got involved only with such an assurance. Balance of Power again ?

Is it a coincidence that America went in right after the Vietnamese defeated the French? The French were trying to get their old colonies back and America was just doing them a favor

Russia withdraw missiles and US withdraw from Turkey , not DEFCON 3

How many more lies , we are not sleeping any more

USA hung south Vietnam out to dry

Wow. This guy might be a brilliant historian in some area, but he definitely needs to stay away from this subject. Not good analysis. Not even superficially.

@jerryrobinson5163

4 жыл бұрын

I am in agreement with you Cj six.

The reason for the Vietnam war is written in the pentagon papers. It’s the containment of China. Same as the Korean War. They’ve been disclosed in the 70s by a whistleblower, but people don’t know about it and that’s not exactly the kind of things freedman talks about. He works to shape opinions, like think tanks, though he says also interesting things to catch the attention.

@johnstuartsmith

Жыл бұрын

The Vietnamese have been doing a pretty good job of containing China by keeping the Chinese out of their part of SouthEast Asia ever since the end of their war with the U.S. and the ARVNs brought an end to Vietnam's need for Chinese military equipment. The Vietnamese don't like being colonized, occupied or bullied by anybody.

If that is true than this is a crime within a crime within a crime.

@mikeygee7

3 жыл бұрын

yup, go arrest them. I got your back.

@joeymurdazalotmore6355

3 жыл бұрын

Its a crime. Full stop after those words. Allowing more is a more sinister evil irrational humanity who fkcn killed ea other for 100k years thats what we do best an r still interested in??? The planet has enough food wealth n security for centuries now. Sigh look its a numbers game but dumb people out fck smart people by multiple magnitudes and the humans from the last batch of of humans r purposefully illusory n lookin for enemies . y ? Who is ur enemy? To me if u charge me tax on errything i buy sell etc n tax where i get this tax able fund for u tax me for lifes xpeses dollars herr there everywhere. Well if that aint an enemy u dont kno what a good crime robbery or clue is in life and should hold on its gonna go fast . enjoy earth

During the war I was stationed in the An Hoa Valley. In 1970 I was ordered to assess the security of a power plant that was under construction. The construction was begun by the French before the French War that was suspended when the conflict between the French and the Vietnamese began. My assessment of the security of the plant was OK because the Vietnamese wanted the power plant as much as we did and it was not in jeopardy because the plant was not working. During my assessment we spoke with the plant general manager. During our meeting I noticed various colored pins were located in the map that was behind the GM. I asked the significance of the pins and was told that these were the locations of mineral deposits that were located in the mountains surrounding the valley. I was shocked. Up until that point I saw nothing but rice paddies and wondering why we were there. My conclusion was that it had nothing to do with rice or saving the Vietnamese people from Communism, it was the untapped wealth that was buried in the mountains that we were after. A sad story, but true.

@davisworth5114

Жыл бұрын

more BS, there is no mineral wealth that you are speaking of, so what happened to these "minerals", the US never got any minerals from VN, you are full of BS, correct.

The 1960s-that extraordinary decade-is celebrating its 50th birthday one year at a time. Happy birthday, 1965! How, though, do you commemorate the Vietnam War, the era’s signature catastrophe? After all, our government prosecuted its brutal and indiscriminate war under false pretexts, long after most citizens objected, and failed to achieve any of its stated objectives. More than 58,000 Americans were killed along with more than 4 million Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians. So what exactly do we write on the jubilee party invitation? You probably know the answer. We’ve been rehearsing it for decades. You leave out every troubling memory of the war and simply say: “Let’s honor all our military veterans for their service and sacrifice.” For a little perspective on the 50th anniversary, consider this: we’re now as distant from the 1960s as the young Bob Dylan was from Teddy Roosevelt. For today’s typical college students, the Age of Aquarius is ancient history. Most of their parents weren’t even alive in 1965 when President Lyndon Johnson launched a massive escalation of the Vietnam War, initiating the daily bombing of the entire country, North and South, and an enormous buildup of more than half a million troops. In the post-Vietnam decades, our culture has buried so much of the history once considered essential to any debate about that most controversial of all American wars that little of substance remains. Still, oddly enough, most of the 180 students who take my Vietnam War class each year arrive deeply curious. They seem to sense that the subject is like a dark family secret that might finally be exposed. All that most of them know is that the Sixties, the war years, were a “time of turmoil.” As for Vietnam, they have few cultural markers or landmarks, which shouldn’t be surprising. Even Hollywood-that powerful shaper of historical memory-stopped making Vietnam movies long ago. Some of my students have stumbled across old films likeApocalypse Now and Platoon, but it’s rare for even one of them to have seen either of the most searing documentaries made during that war, In the Year of the Pig and Hearts and Minds. Such relics of profound antiwar fervor simply disappeared from popular memory along with the antiwar movement itself. On the other hand, there is an advantage to the fact that students make it to that first class without strong convictions about the war. It means they can be surprised, even shocked, when they learn about the war’s wrenching realities and that’s when real education can begin. For example, many students are stunned to discover that the US government, forever proclaiming its desire to spread democracy, actually blocked Vietnam’s internationally sanctioned reunification election in 1956 because of the near certainty that Vietnamese Communist leader Ho Chi Minh would be the overwhelming winner. They’re even more astonished to discover the kind of “free-fire zone” bloodshed and mayhem the U.S. military unleashed on the South Vietnamese countryside. Nothing shocks them more, though, than the details of the My Lai massacre, in which American ground troops killed, at close range, more than 500 unarmed, unresisting, South Vietnamese civilians-most of them women, children, and old men-over a four-hour stretch on March 16, 1968. In high school, many students tell me, My Lai is not discussed. An American Tragedy Don’t think that young students are the only products of a whitewashed history of the Vietnam War

@notsoancientpelican

4 жыл бұрын

Johnson Young This commentary should be published in some form that receives national distribution. Outstanding perspective and analysis.

"Master of Wars" Bob Dylan

I keep pausing this video just so that it feels like I get to listen to George for a little bit longer :P

huge sums made

@franklinlewis6059

3 жыл бұрын

By L.B.J.

Any of u clowns heard of a little fight in No.V'nam called Dien Ben Phu ?? Read up on it. The French LOST to No.V'nam! The US never had such a debacle in Nam. Period. That simple! We started to re supply the french AFTER this battle ! That is how we got involved. Semper Fi.

@larrywheeler9917

4 жыл бұрын

French colony. America tried that colony bullshit with the Vietnamese. Debacle after debacle. Lol

Not a single mention of "losing China", Korean War, George Kennan, domino theory. And if DuGalle is to blame, why not mention his threat of going to the Soviets if US supported Vietnam's independence? As for the issue of credibility, after Viet Minh's victory against the French United States had no obligation to continue its involvement in Indochina. This is a good example of what propaganda looks like, manipulating history to support a position on present-day issues. For anyone interested in the subject, I would recommend Ken Burns' documentary called "Vietnam War".

Whenever someone quotes the old warning of Douglas MacArthur about staying out of a land war on Asia I have to chuckle. He himself involved the U.S. more deeply in the Korean War, in Asia, than was prudent and became fanatical about fighting the Chinese, wanting to nuke them, when the going got rough in late 1950.

Interesting: West Germany sent a hospital to Saigon during the war; they WERE watching.

@CharlesCoderre-yv1cu

10 ай бұрын

did they make dr Mengele chief of staff/

"Plenty good money to be made buy supping the army with the tools of the trade." Don't try to rationalize greedy psychopaths.

@versatec1

2 жыл бұрын

Don't try to rationalize greedy Psychopaths.... excellent comment👍

@versatec1

2 жыл бұрын

I suspect it was even more than greed but let's not go down the Rabbit Hole

@versatec1

2 жыл бұрын

Pretty much everything we've been told is a lie

like mexico in 1911,china and vietnam had a big problem : a tiny minority had a lot of land,the majority none and farming was the only mean of subsistence-a revolution is inevitable-the downtrodden landless serfs (call them the masses,the commies,the viet cong,anything you want but they will fight anything connected with the landed class) will fight-btw my family is one of the biggest landowning family in vietnam but if i was born landless,i would have joined the v.c.-in america,the notion of class does not apply but in vietnam,china,people were divided along classes-peasants rebellions were frequent occurrences and even emperors were afraid of them

This rebuilding of Nixon is B.S. DEC. 31, 2016 NY times exposed HR Haldeman's notes which show Nixon contacted Hanoi during the 1968 election and BEFORE he was president and told them not to negotiate with LBJ and wait for a better deal with Nixon. The Christmas bombing was a terrible dog and pony show. The US defeat was pre-negotiated. LBJ new this, but Nixon had dirt on him, so he didn't expose the treason. I have no admiration for LBJ, but Nixon caused the rise of Pol Pot, and he took us very close to nuclear war by orbiting nuke armed B-52s outside of the USSR. Watergate was petty theft compared to the real story. He really was one of the worst presidents despite his China negotiations.

If you think this was bad, let me tell you about the Tournament of Power! The universe was almost erased!!!

Does this gangster Freedman talk about a political soap opera ? Or a monopoly game ? Or about three million people that were killed ? Including some seventy thousand poor Americans who could be nice grandfathers today.

No one cares, but Closed captioning at the end says "thank you so much for your time jerky" I think its mean to call him jerky

'The Vietnam War was necessary' in the end: this argument was also made by Michael Lind, see his book on it and a recent intervention. I'm not sure.

freidman is one of those people who is so well-known that you can safely ignore any further opinions from him.

THIS GUY IS THE DEVIL, HE SMILES WITHOUT REMORSE, LOT OF US SOLDIERS, VIETNAMESE DEAD IN THAT WAR.

Was Vietnam a Nato member? Combat Vet, still mad

@SeattlePioneer

Жыл бұрын

No.

Recommended to watch: "NoStressMike AK vs AR - facts"

We went to Vietnam to get Kennedy reelected. Kennedy's advisors (I met one) thought that he was seen as "soft on Communism" (his words) because of the failures of Cuba and the Berlin wall Actually the American public was fooled, but the advisors were not. So they thought to move the "sphere of confrontation," (his words,) to the far east. Seymour Hirsch's (If I've spelled that right) book, "The Dark Side of Camelot," has some information. And I spent a year in the Mekong Delta. I don't remember George Friedman in Vietnam, so I didn't watch even four minutes of this. I have written about this before, but now that I am 81 years old I have finally realized that people have their own view and there is nothing anyone can do to change their view. Gotta fix the grandkids dinner.

@peaceandlove544

4 жыл бұрын

Maybe Kennedy gave in to the military war complex/deep state indirectly when adviced by his "advisers" (that served those interests) and thus went into Vietnam. Did he ever really wanted to get out?

@williamheyman5439

4 жыл бұрын

Yes. I heard (the advisor that I knew) that there was a Presidential Decision Memorandum about withdrawal, presumably after he was reelected. No one seems certain, and it became moot when he died, Johnson became presidents, so they were all obviated. There was no "military war complex" advocating for involvement in Vietnam (I was a US army captain at the time.) And I went to the Armed Forces Staff College and the National War College,, was a strategic planner, and the idea of intervention in Vietnam did not start with the armed forces, that I knew.

@joelfernando2031

4 жыл бұрын

Kennedy had a thing for Communism because he armed the communist rebels in Africa against us the Portuguese! All the Kennedys were communist just like the Democrat party!

@joelfernando2031

4 жыл бұрын

Kennedy offered Salazar one billion dollars for Portugal to leave our territory in Africa....Salazar told him Portugal is not for sale!

From Australian Grunt; “what a load of Fucker crap”.

@briantweed1

4 жыл бұрын

David B George Friedman is spot on. What do you disagree with? Or are you just too dim witted to understand?

@clivevale

4 жыл бұрын

Well said David, I can't believe people would suck up this tripe!!

@dm2781632

4 жыл бұрын

Brian Tweed you lost me when you start using names, were you there, unlikely and if not you are the one that is clueless.

@briantweed1

4 жыл бұрын

David B Right. Because “fucker crap,” is intelligent discourse! Lol

Yeah, Vietnam's many resources, had nothing to do with it!

Did a nuclear bomb go off at 8:30?

Don't buy it. French themselves had abandoned Vietnam before we went in. Moreover, he is giving far too much credit to some nonexistent well thought out long term strategy. Real reasons seem to be more in line with what Eisenhower warned about: beware the military industrial complex. Iraq another prime example. Then throw in failure to understand importance of nationalism to Vietnamese people.

You know you can’t trust someone when they speak so flippantly about others lives and about a war that was based on lies.

The long term purpose of the Vietnam war was to contain China. Capitalism ans our military were the tactics used. The long term goals remain unfulfilled and a current source of conflict. But some of the tactics were quite successful in laying the groundwork for a compliant ally against China.

Not to detract but, was the American involvement in the Korean war of 1950-53 due also to France's Charles De Gaul?