Sen. John McCain diagnosed with brain cancer

[Dill]

(07-24-2017, 04:10 PM)Bengalzona Wrote:  After the French agreed to leave Vietnam, we had made an agreement that there would be a national referendum. When we didn't like the reports we received about the "North" (namely that they were buddying with the Soviets and that they actually had a base of support in the "South") we postponed the election and eventually set up Diem with his own government in the South.

It was at that point, IMO, that things "went South" for the U.S. (pardon the pun). Diem was corrupt, nepotistic and represented only a small minority of the population in the South. He was despised by most of the people in the South because he lost battles against the Viet Cong and because of his governments' anti-Buddhist policies. Also, it is my understanding that even the U.S. supported the coup that overthrew him (i.e. we were fed up with him). But by that time (1963), the damage was done. The Viet Cong were entrenched in the South and the South Vietnam ship was sinking. We only kept it afloat for another decade.

(On a side note: As hated as Diem was, the population in the South still found him better than his predecessor, Bao Dai!)

As far as aggression, I think it is clear that the North were generally the aggressors. They were supplying and supporting the Viet Cong in the South (see 'Ho Chi Mihn Trail'). Their army made some incursions into the South. Although it should be noted that the International Control Commission in 1957 found that both sides were guilty of breaking the terms of the armistice. I think if the South had had a base of support like the Viet Cong in the North, they would have utilized it in the same way that the North did to them. Under that purely hypothetical situation, they would have been the aggressors.

The North felt justified in their aggression because they felt the U.S. and the South had reneged on the promise of a national referendum.

LOL, they didn't just "feel" that. Diem rigged a plebiscite (on CIA advice) to legitimate his rule, then flat out refused to hold the elections. The State of Vietnam, which Diem overthrew, was an extension of France, and so never signed the Geneva Accords in its own name. And Diem overthrew that government anyway. His government was the reconstituted Vietnamese military arm of the French colonial administration.

So here I have to disagree with my long-time forum buddy and dispute the legitimacy of Diem's government. Diem was arresting former Vietminh even before the coup. The CIA agreed that in a national referendum Ho would likely get 90%+ of the vote. So to save democracy in Vietnam the US had to destroy it.

When Diem came to power, people probably liked Bao Dai less, but by '59 that was unlikely. When I began looking into the Vietnam conflict (while we were still in Vietnam!) one of the things which struck me first and most was how different the South was from the North. There were large religious organizations like the Hoa Hao and Cao Dai which had their own armies of thousands, not to mention the Saigon mafia Binh Xuyen--in addition to the Buddhists. Suppressing those organizations created future Viet Cong. Like Trump, he drew family members into government, and went so far as to decree that the birthday of his brother, the archbishop of Vietnam, be celebrated in place of the Buddha's.  When a monk burned himself in protest, Diem's famous sister-in-law Madame Nhu (the dragon lady) sneeringly called it a barbecue.  That's how the upper class of landlords and civil servants viewed "the people." As civil unrest, riots, etc., increased, Diem (and the US military) systematically described all opposition as "Communist." 

I am guessing you remember or have read about all this. Here is a photo of the elegant Madam Nhu at target practice.