Yet Another Set of Lies, Netflix's New Documentary on the Vietnam War

[Davy]

Netflix has a new series on the Vietnam War, called Turning Point: The Vietnam War.

That's all we need, more Leftist propaganda blaming the United States and its allies for trying to help the poor South Vietnamese nation fight attempted Communist takeover of their country.

And what really hurts one's soul, to a Vietnam veteran (like I am), there are Vietnam veterans that give witnesses for those kind of Leftist documentaries that benefit the Communist strategy against the United States and their actions in Vietnam when all wars contain atrocities, done on BOTH sides, and the Communist North Vietnamese did some of the worse atrocities upon its own citizens that one would think not Ho was in charge in the North, but that Joseph Stalin and his execution platoons had risen from the dead in Hanoi.

Remember one of the main policies of Communist Socialism. "The end justifies the means." In case one doesn't understand that, it means whatever... the Communists do, they believe is justified by their reaching their ultimate goal of World Socialism. If that involves slaughtering whole villages, children and babies included, which they did in South Vietnam, or terrorist bomb attacks even upon their own people, as they did regularly in Saigon and other South Vietnamese cities, or their western agents even infiltrating American college campuses to trick its students to riot against the war and even fly the North Vietnamese flag at their rallies, then those things are all just 'means' to the end goal, and not important to them, except as extortion to scare the weaker peoples to bend to their Leftist policies.

If you really want to learn what Communist philosophy is about, I suggest reading ex-FBI agent Cleon Skousen's 1958 book, The Naked Communist. He doesn't cover what most do, like little high points that really aren't high points at all, but covers the actual meat of what Communist theory is about, and the many atrocities it has committed even upon its own peoples during its quest for takeover.


On The Vietnam War:

I was not a 'ground pounder', or 'grunt', what we in the military called an infantry soldier. I was a crew chief in the USAF on B-52D bombers stationed at Guam, which was on an island near Japan. U.S. B-52's would perform missions in Vietnam from U.S. bases like Guam, Thailand, Okinawa, etc.

My understanding of why the U.S. was in Vietnam back then was like any young G.I. who had a desire to serve their country. My father was a U.S. WWII combat Marine, and I had great-grandfathers that served in the War Between The States, and in the American Revolution. So I had a little bit of military style upbringing, but really not that much. Instead, I watched the Vietnam War on TV, and that made me decide to volunteer. I went into the USAF late in the war, as soon as I graduated High School, so I had plenty of time to see what U.S. troops were having to go through, even by the major TV news outlets that propagandized the war.

Having returned to the U.S. after serving in the USAF for several years overseas after Vietnam, like many vets I began to look deeper into reasons why the U.S. was really there in Vietnam, looking kind of for the 'big picture'. It took many years before I began to understand, and becoming a Christian certainly helped in that understanding.

The U.S., especially in its own hemisphere, has had a policy for a long time in helping its neighbor countries that want a stable, civilized, and productive environment. Sometimes the U.S. has had to send in the U.S. Marines to quell some of the uprisings in poorer countries in our own western hemisphere. Doing that isn't really a power-control issue by the U.S., even though there will always exist the Machiavelli type politicians in all governments of the world. It was more about helping the poor people that were suffering in those countries, and that were experiencing atrocities by those who sought power using force.

Can the Christian nations justify their helping poorer countries to fight power-hungry tyrants that don't care about the people, and instead oust those wicked leaders and instead help those peoples to create a stable and productive country? Yes, the Christian nations CAN... justify doing that to help the poor and downtrodden in other nations. But there will always be the talebearer among us that will stir up ignorant peoples everywhere. And God is against the talebearer (Leviticus 19). Even today with what President Trump is doing for the poorer nations, the talebearers instead choose to stir political hatred against him with their power-hungry themes and anti-God rhetoric. The Communists are masters at the art of talebearing, stirring up strife and falsehoods among the people to get them to riot, making it easier to take over a poorer nation. That's why the U.S. and its allies were in Vietnam, to help the people of South Vietnam fight the Communist north who were trying force a takeover. Same thing happened in Korea.

With the fall of the Berlin Wall and Russia's Perestroika democratization programs designed to ease up on using capitalist economic principles in the Soviet nations, that is solid proof that Communist-Socialist philosophy does not work economically. Traditionally Russia would threaten attack in some way, and U.S. politicians would always given in, and send Russia economic aid. When the Berlin Wall went down in 1989, we sent them MacDonald's and Pizza Hut. And western big business was happy... to send business their way. Yet the Kremlin policy toward World Communist-Socialism still never changed. To this day, they are still in power over Russia and its people, even while we do business with them. And not only they, but also Communist countries like Vietnam and Cambodia. World leaders today, globalists, still believe in a New World Order, even to include those Communist nations, considering they will eventually bend and break from their Communist-Socialist policies. They are correct somewhat, because one of the policies of Communism is peaceful takeover, little by little, and only if that does not work then their policy is to use force. What many do not see is that those globalists, many of them wealthy living in the West, are also Socialists. Thus World Socialism is actually now the goal of hidden Communist policy. And Lenin did say that, "Communism is socialism."


I had almost enlisted in the U.S. Marines, was going to follow my father's footsteps. He talked me out of it, and an uncle who retired from the USAF talked me into choosing the Air Force instead. I thank God I did that, because I feel for my fellow veterans who fought on the ground during the Vietnam war, because of what they went through. So I understand feelings they may have had against the Vietnam war after they returned to U.S., especially with having to experience all the Leftist propaganda college student age peoples were dishing out on us, like spitting on us coming in from overseas at U.S. airports, and their parading anti-war signs and Communist propaganda. If you hung out with anyone your own age that wasn't a Vet, you had to compromise with the Leftist influenced gals if you wanted a date. The Communist propaganda in large American cities was that strong in that era. Riots in the streets would even happen between the older working men and Leftist influenced teenagers and college students and their Communist Party USA propaganda agents.

Some Black leaders in the southeastern U.S. that had become members of the Communist Party USA came out of their programs leaving the Party and admitted the Communists were trying to recruit the Black peoples living in the South to riot, thinking they could create a Communist territory in the South that would takeover the rest of the nation. What tactic did they use against the Blacks? Talebearer tactics, like, "you know them White peoples don't really care anything about you Blacks, and that they want to belittle and destroy you", etc., etc., etc.

The hardest thing to realize for those in my era and type of Christian upbringing, kind of like Ozzie and Harriet mode, innocent and trusting, but deceived, is how since the idea of 'collectivism' started with the French Revolution, and then took off with Communism in 1917 Russia, is how there were hidden spies for the Communists existing within the U.S. government. It took me years to understand this. I'll give you an example. President Woodrow Wilson in 1913 mentioned the phrase New Word Order in his speech. He was a Socialist. And his right-hand man, advisor at the White House that had an office next to his was Col. Mandell House, a known world Socialist who favored a one world government. When Congress voted to not join the League of Nations (start of U.N.) in Wilson's era, Mandell House was emotionally downtrodden by it, and wrote a book called Philip Drew: Administrator, which was all about moving towards a one world government. The establishing of a "one world government" is still in politician's hands in Washington to this day. Is Trump on that plan? I don't think so, because that plan means the U.S. and all nations, have to give up a lot of their sovereignty. Trump appears to be bringing back a lot of U.S. sovereignty that previous presidents have caused with their GATT and NAFTA and CAFTA treaties, and Trump is rejecting certain little Leftist factions supported by the United Nations organization that specifically exists to bring all nations under a one world government.

(Continued...)

 

[Davy]

(Continued from above...)

Another event, the reason behind the start of the Korean war; Dean Acheson, U.S. secretary of state in the 1950's, had mentioned specific countries under the protection of the United States. It of course was a message to the Soviet Union to not mess with those nations. However, Acheson forgot to mention South Korea. So North Korea took that as a message that they could attack South Korea and the U.S. would not get involved. U.S foreign policy about South Korea was actually that, so Acheson wasn't acting alone. When North Korea invaded South Korea suddenly, President Truman instead reversed U.S. foreign policy on Korea, and immediately went to the U.N. for permission to send U.S. troops. If you haven't yet figured this out yet, the main purpose behind allowing the Korea struggle was to empower... the United Nations organization. President Bush at a U.N. meeting after the Gulf War said basically the same idea, that the Gulf War purpose was to empower the United Nations. Something like 28 nations fought under the U.N. flag in the Gulf War. What is this about then? It is about the movement towards a one world government.

Even President Bill Clinton served that movement during his presidency. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and attended Oxford at England, known as the Rhodes scholarship's university. Thing is, the Rhodes scholarship program is not... what most people believe it is. I had assumed, so likewise my father who wanted me to attend Vanderbilt University in Nashville, or the University of the South at Swanee, TN., as both of those schools were known as Rhodes scholarship supported schools. In Bill Clinton's inaugural speech, he endorsed his Georgetown history professor Carroll Quigley. Carroll Quigley wrote a book on western history in 1966 called Tragedy and Hope. In that book he outlined, and even named names, behind the British Round Table group of Socialists and their foundation of the Rhodes scholarship program. They were students of Cecil B. Rhodes, a wealthy British gold and diamond magnate in South Africa that supported the idea of a one world government. His great wealth was left to his students, which became the British Round Table group that existed behind many political goings ons in western history. The Rhodes scholarship program was created to specifically train... western leaders in passing legislation, little by little, to lead to a one world government. That is the main purpose of Rhodes scholars, of which Bill Clinton was one. Bill Clinton rushed in the last hours of his presidency during the Christmas holidays when Congress was not present, and gave away the Panama Canal which the U.S. built and operated for decades.

Quigley's book was knocked out of print back in the late 1960's, and he had to sue his publisher to find out why they destroyed the publishing plates. Quigley said his book must have said something "the establishment" didn't want known. Why do I mention all this? It is to show that there are operations behind the scenes hidden from view of most people, mainly because most don't look for them, and their movement has been going on for a long, long time, even before any of us here were born. Trump has actually thrown a monkey wrench in their goals, but not ultimately, because even he is moving the world towards the required world peace situation required as part of a one world government. And how can one in power like Trump not help the poor in countries, and help make their economies and governments stable and allowing the peoples to be free like the U.S. founders wanted for the United States? What amount of Communist-Socialist-Leftist talebearing can oppose the goodness of that?

Likewise in the Vietnam war, these opposite players in the U.S. and western nations was playing out. One group wanted to help the South Vietnamese peoples have a stable government under liberty of the people, like us. But another group working behind the scenes in the West wanted to further the Communist cause towards a one world government. This is why U.S. politicians were afraid to escalate U.S. involvement in Vietnam to the amount needed in order to maybe, just maybe, create another South Korea outcome. U.S. generals in Korea were given autonomy to repel the North Korean Communists all the way back to their borders and beyond. Then U.S. leaders got scared, worrying that Red China or Russia might get involved in Korea. FYI, the Chinese Communists and Russians were alreay there in Korea, as advisors. Same thing in Vietnam.

Soviet advisors would help setup the SAM missile sites for the North Vietnamese, which U.S. policy while they were doing that was to not... attack those SAM sites while they were setting them up. Only after those SAM sites were established, did U.S. attack policy on attacking them change, and thus many of our U.S. aircraft were lost because of that hand-tying policy by U.S. politicians.

The one thing that Communists do understand is use of force. That is why when President Nixon got elected he started a serious bombing campaign against North Vietnam, which should have been done alll along, continually. That brought the North Vietnamese to the peace table.

Instead of setting up our soldiers to guard a base camp and sending out patrols, isolating them as easy targets out in the plains and jungles, the U.S. military should have used tactics like they did in Korea or WWII, taking ground and keeping it.

Instead of U.S. politicians telling U.S. figter pilots they couldn't fire on enemy fighters unless they first were fired upon, our pilots should have been allowd to attack immediately as soon as identifying them as foe. And our pilots should also have been allowed to attack enemy fights that were on the ground, which politicians in Washington also prevented.

No wonder many in our U.S. military in the lower ranks got fed up with the war, and saw it as useless and degrading. The U.S. policies being followed were obviously from crept in Communist strategy controlled by the United Nations. Can you see the difference with the Gulf War? Even the U.S. generals said in the Gulf War that wouldn't be like another Vietnam.

And do you think the Vietnamese peoples in today's Communist Vietnam are better off than before the war? Not really, simply because Communist economies do... not... work. That is why they especially sought trade with the nations once their political environment calmed down a bit. See the film First They Killed My Father about Communist takeover of Cambodia if you want to know what likely happened in Vietnam once the Communists took over.

 

[Luther7]

(Continued from above...)

Another event, the reason behind the start of the Korean war; Dean Acheson, U.S. secretary of state in the 1950's, had mentioned specific countries under the protection of the United States. It of course was a message to the Soviet Union to not mess with those nations. However, Acheson forgot to mention South Korea. So North Korea took that as a message that they could attack South Korea and the U.S. would not get involved. U.S foreign policy about South Korea was actually that, so Acheson wasn't acting alone. When North Korea invaded South Korea suddenly, President Truman instead reversed U.S. foreign policy on Korea, and immediately went to the U.N. for permission to send U.S. troops. If you haven't yet figured this out yet, the main purpose behind allowing the Korea struggle was to empower... the United Nations organization. President Bush at a U.N. meeting after the Gulf War said basically the same idea, that the Gulf War purpose was to empower the United Nations. Something like 28 nations fought under the U.N. flag in the Gulf War. What is this about then? It is about the movement towards a one world government.

Even President Bill Clinton served that movement during his presidency. Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and attended Oxford at England, known as the Rhodes scholarship's university. Thing is, the Rhodes scholarship program is not... what most people believe it is. I had assumed, so likewise my father who wanted me to attend Vanderbilt University in Nashville, or the University of the South at Swanee, TN., as both of those schools were known as Rhodes scholarship supported schools. In Bill Clinton's inaugural speech, he endorsed his Georgetown history professor Carroll Quigley. Carroll Quigley wrote a book on western history in 1966 called Tragedy and Hope. In that book he outlined, and even named names, behind the British Round Table group of Socialists and their foundation of the Rhodes scholarship program. They were students of Cecil B. Rhodes, a wealthy British gold and diamond magnate in South Africa that supported the idea of a one world government. His great wealth was left to his students, which became the British Round Table group that existed behind many political goings ons in western history. The Rhodes scholarship program was created to specifically train... western leaders in passing legislation, little by little, to lead to a one world government. That is the main purpose of Rhodes scholars, of which Bill Clinton was one. Bill Clinton rushed in the last hours of his presidency during the Christmas holidays when Congress was not present, and gave away the Panama Canal which the U.S. built and operated for decades.

Quigley's book was knocked out of print back in the late 1960's, and he had to sue his publisher to find out why they destroyed the publishing plates. Quigley said his book must have said something "the establishment" didn't want known. Why do I mention all this? It is to show that there are operations behind the scenes hidden from view of most people, mainly because most don't look for them, and their movement has been going on for a long, long time, even before any of us here were born. Trump has actually thrown a monkey wrench in their goals, but not ultimately, because even he is moving the world towards the required world peace situation required as part of a one world government. And how can one in power like Trump not help the poor in countries, and help make their economies and governments stable and allowing the peoples to be free like the U.S. founders wanted for the United States? What amount of Communist-Socialist-Leftist talebearing can oppose the goodness of that?

Likewise in the Vietnam war, these opposite players in the U.S. and western nations was playing out. One group wanted to help the South Vietnamese peoples have a stable government under liberty of the people, like us. But another group working behind the scenes in the West wanted to further the Communist cause towards a one world government. This is why U.S. politicians were afraid to escalate U.S. involvement in Vietnam to the amount needed in order to maybe, just maybe, create another South Korea outcome. U.S. generals in Korea were given autonomy to repel the North Korean Communists all the way back to their borders and beyond. Then U.S. leaders got scared, worrying that Red China or Russia might get involved in Korea. FYI, the Chinese Communists and Russians were alreay there in Korea, as advisors. Same thing in Vietnam.

Soviet advisors would help setup the SAM missile sites for the North Vietnamese, which U.S. policy while they were doing that was to not... attack those SAM sites while they were setting them up. Only after those SAM sites were established, did U.S. attack policy on attacking them change, and thus many of our U.S. aircraft were lost because of that hand-tying policy by U.S. politicians.

The one thing that Communists do understand is use of force. That is why when President Nixon got elected he started a serious bombing campaign against North Vietnam, which should have been done alll along, continually. That brought the North Vietnamese to the peace table.

Instead of setting up our soldiers to guard a base camp and sending out patrols, isolating them as easy targets out in the plains and jungles, the U.S. military should have used tactics like they did in Korea or WWII, taking ground and keeping it.

Instead of U.S. politicians telling U.S. figter pilots they couldn't fire on enemy fighters unless they first were fired upon, our pilots should have been allowd to attack immediately as soon as identifying them as foe. And our pilots should also have been allowed to attack enemy fights that were on the ground, which politicians in Washington also prevented.

No wonder many in our U.S. military in the lower ranks got fed up with the war, and saw it as useless and degrading. The U.S. policies being followed were obviously from crept in Communist strategy controlled by the United Nations. Can you see the difference with the Gulf War? Even the U.S. generals said in the Gulf War that wouldn't be like another Vietnam.

And do you think the Vietnamese peoples in today's Communist Vietnam are better off than before the war? Not really, simply because Communist economies do... not... work. That is why they especially sought trade with the nations once their political environment calmed down a bit. See the film First They Killed My Father about Communist takeover of Cambodia if you want to know what likely happened in Vietnam once the Communists took over.

Davy, do you know who is responsible for creating Communism ? And the religion that it's patterned after? You provided a lot of information here, which is appreciated. What about the origins? And the ultimate goal? It's very Biblical.