|
Resa LaRu Kirkland
‘Cronkiting’ North Korea Won’t Work This Time
November 29, 2010
You know the
man on the right. He’s hard to miss with his ridiculous hair and Dr. Evil
wardrobe. But do you recognize the man on the left? Most of you probably don’t.
Allow me to give you a refresher.
After we won
the Tet Offensive in 1968, the Hippy Press here in America sank to new depths.
Walter Cronkite, "the most trusted man in America,” made a perverse choice.
He looked directly into the camera and lied through his "most trusted” teeth.
He told
America that after what happened at Tet, surely the war was now lost.
So what
happened at Tet?
This 1995 interview by Wall Street Journal’s Stephen Young of North
Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin tells us pretty clearly:
Question: How
did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?
Answer: By
fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi
Minh said, "We don't need to win
military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."
Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?
A: It was
essential to our strategy. Support of the war from our rear was completely
secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would
listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the
American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda, and former
Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should
hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda,
wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed
of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?
A: Keenly.
Q: Why?
A: Those
people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part
of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor.
America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the
ability to mobilize a will to win.
Q: What was the
purpose of the 1968 Tet Offensive?
A: To relieve the
pressure Gen. Westmoreland was putting on us in late 1966 and 1967 and to weaken
American resolve during a presidential election year.
Tet was designed
to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly defended parts of
South Vietnam cities during a holiday and a truce when few South Vietnamese
troops would be on duty. Before the main attack, we would entice American units
to advance close to the borders, away from the cities. By attacking all South
Vietnam's major cities, we would spread out our forces and neutralize the impact
of American firepower. Attacking on a broad front, we would lose some battles
but win others. We used local forces nearby each target to frustrate discovery
of our plans. Small teams, like the one which attacked the U.S. Embassy in
Saigon, would be sufficient. It was a guerrilla strategy of hit-and-run raids.
Q: What about the
results?
A: Our losses
were staggering and a complete surprise. Giap later told me that Tet had been a
military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when
Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for re-election. The second and
third waves in May and September were, in retrospect, mistakes. Our forces in
the South were nearly wiped out by all the fighting in 1968. It took us until
1971 to re-establish our presence, but we had to use North Vietnamese troops as
local guerrillas. If the American forces had not begun to withdraw under Nixon
in 1969, they could have punished us severely. We suffered badly in 1969 and
1970 as it was.
Q: What of Nixon?
A: Well, when
Nixon stepped down because of Watergate we knew we would win. Pham Van Dong
[prime minister of North Vietnam] said of Gerald Ford, the new president, "he's
the weakest president in U.S. history; the people didn't elect him; even if you
gave him candy, he doesn't dare to intervene in Vietnam again." We tested Ford's
resolve by attacking Phuoc Long in January 1975. When Ford kept American B-52's
in their hangers, our leadership decided on a big offensive against South
Vietnam.
Q: What else?
A: We had the
impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors.
Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.
I want you to keep this
interview in mind as I juxtapose what has happened this month with the LA
missile and North Korea’s declaration of war in their attack of the South Korean
island Yeonpyeong with the Cronkiting of the Vietnam War.
On November 8, 2010, a
large, two stage, ballistic missile launched from a submarine lit up the early
evening rush hour sky off the California coast. And what did we do?
Nothing. Not only did we
do nothing, but our own leaders lied to us and covered it up.
Our own leaders.
North Korea and China
didn’t have to worry about consequences, sanctions, condemnations, or
reciprocity. In fact, they didn’t even have to worry about us marching in the
street demanding their heads. They were given a pass, a get out of jail free
card, a political thumbs up.
So tell me…if you were Kim
Jong-il, who wants to hand his kingdom over to his son soon, what would that say
to you?
The exact same thing it
said to Col. Tin. It would tell you that if we aren’t willing to defend
ourselves, and would in fact call this horrific breach of our sovereignty
everything except what it actually was, how likely are we to defend an ally?
The LA missile
was this administration’s Phuoc Loc: a test by an enemy of our resolve. When we
did nothing, they took that green light and ran to the next intersection a
little closer to home but still a message to us. I’m surprised our
administration didn’t force the South Korean government to join in the mass
delusion we’ve seen in the outrageous explanations here to tell its people that
what happened on Yeonpyeong was merely airplane contrails.
And to top it
off, China isn’t even willing to play "Let’s pretend!” anymore; their sheep’s
clothing is off and their true, Maoist selves are utterly exposed. North Korea
may be a tool, but that tool is made in China, used by China, and when finished,
will be destroyed by China, ‘cause evil always inevitably eats its own.
But more than
what is being said and done is the alarming pattern being established. Why is
that important? Because patterns are mathematical, and math is the language of
the universe. No matter how hard we may want it to be different, we are not
above the laws of math. No matter how many laws you enact declaring that 2 +
2=5, it is forever and always will be 4. Math cannot be Politically Castrated,
manipulated with emotion, lies, or force. It simply "is.”
In fact, not only
did we do nothing to help ourselves or our ally, the NoKo aggression succeeded.
Yep, once again NoKo got good for evil. They gave death, and we gave words.
According to our pattern, we will soon be sending them more bribe money
and supplies, and encouraging other nations to do the same. And according to
their patterns, they will attack again, only sooner and harder this time.
I’ll bet we see something as big or bigger by the end of the year.
And how did NoKo
say thank you for us not returning to them what they gave? With yet
more artillery shelling
on November 26, while
our own Gen. Walter Sharp
was touring the damage on the island. Yeah, they’re really worried about us! The
world made it clear on Obama’s 2 billion dollar trip-o-ganza how little respect
they have for us; physical attack is the next logical step
And did China
rein in NoKo? Nope. After "taking note” of what NoKo had done, they used the
last few days to
lodge an official protest
against the regular joint US-South Korean military exercise. Make no mistake,
people; China supported NoKo with hundreds of thousands of troops, millions in
supplies and weaponry, and the use of their mighty weight to stall, alter, and
frustrate negotiations during the active phase of the Korean War. That pattern
should be telling you something. And if China is so great at influencing NoKo,
how is it in the past 15 years it hasn’t worked once?
Isn’t the answer
obvious? Because what China says publicly doesn’t come close to
resembling what they are clearly doing privately. No, China’s fruits are
obvious, and NoKo is doing exactly what they want them to do. And don’t believe
for one moment they would never support NoKo in war because they fear mass
refugees. They will handle these new unwanted the same way they handle their own
unwanted, and you know how they handle their own who become "inconvenient.”
It is Mutually
Assured Destruction, alright…two enemy nations agreeing on how to destroy us and
our allies.
Patterns don’t
lie. This pattern of giving in and giving up, or altering the natural
consequences that evil behavior deserves, has been in play for over 40 years
now. And it began with a wretched little man who lied to America about what
America was doing; and what the enemy back then had, and hadn’t, done.
Read again what
Col. Tin said about Vietnam, only imagine this time that it is being said by
NoKo (parenthesis and contents added by me to help connect):
"By fighting a
long war which would break their will to help South (Korea)…’We don't need to
win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get
out.’ (The still-going Korean War is on its sixth decade now)
"Every day our
leadership would listen to world news over the (television) at 9 a.m. to follow
the (reaction of America’s leadership to our provocations.) (There must have
been dancing and kimchee when we covered for them in the
LA Mystery Missile.)
"(Yeonpyeong)
was designed to influence American public opinion. We would attack poorly
defended parts of South (Korea) during a holiday and a truce when few South
(Korean supplies) would be (available.)
"…he's the
weakest president in U.S. history…even if you gave him candy, he doesn't dare to
intervene in Korea…We tested (Obama’s) resolve by (launching a ballistic missile
off their west coast in November 2010.) When (Obama lied to the American people
and covered up our actions), our leadership decided on a big offensive against
South (Korea.)
"We
had the impression that American commanders had
their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a
maximum force for greatest military effect.”
Cronkite is dead
and gone, yet the evil tactics he successfully employed remain. One thing always
bothered me about Cronkite’s lies regarding Vietnam. Pres. Johnson knew damn
well that we hadn’t lost Tet; he knew Cronkite was lying. Yet instead of
accusing him of fraud and holding him accountable for the lie, Johnson abandoned
the truth of what had really happened and gave up. Why didn’t Johnson put him on
trial for lying about military assaults, victories and defeats, and our troops
during war time?
And why aren’t
we doing it now? Because whether you actually call it that or not, we are at
war, complete with submarines, missiles, and lie after lie from our own leaders.
Two plus two is
four, people, and subs plus missiles plus shelling plus cover-ups is war. It was
a pattern established from the beginning; not even "the most trusted man in
America” was above the laws of math.
And neither are
we.
Keep the faith, bros, in all things courage, and no substitute for victory. |
