shortly before the fall of saigon in 1975, the united states voided all requirements for valid immigration documents, and took any and all who sought asylum. busloads of refugees were carried to the airport to be flown out. thousands were evacuated. during 'operation babylift', over 3,000 infants and children were airlifted out of vietnam to be adopted out to american families. most of the were orphans, or abandoned by their families because they were mixed race.
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: shortly before the fall of saigon in 1975, the united states voided all requirements for valid immigration documents, and took any and all who sought asylum. busloads of refugees were carried to the airport to be flown out. thousands were evacuated. during 'operation babylift', over 3,000 infants and children were airlifted out of vietnam to be adopted out to american families. most of the were orphans, or abandoned by their families because they were mixed race.
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
I have read that the Canadians did not have the means to evacuate them - there was very limited transport available. I'll have to dig back into it to get the details....
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
I have read that the Canadians did not have the means to evacuate them - there was very limited transport available. I'll have to dig back into it to get the details....
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
turbonium wrote: I have read that the Canadians did not have the means to evacuate them - there was very limited transport available. I'll have to dig back into it to get the details....
they had room on the plane for two diplomat vehicles stuffed with art and souvenirs. they took those, rather than people.
pleading a poverty of means in the situation is doubly cowardly in my opinion.
they had room on the plane for two diplomat vehicles stuffed with art and souvenirs. they took those, rather than people.
pleading a poverty of means in the situation is doubly cowardly in my opinion.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: they had room on the plane for two diplomat vehicles stuffed with art and souvenirs. they took those, rather than people.
pleading a poverty of means in the situation is doubly cowardly in my opinion.
If that's the case, it IS very disgusting. You know, I think more than a few of these diplomats have questionable morals and character. This case reminds me of Herman Goering with his gluttonous taste for "objets d'art", as the Nazis devoured Europe. It's quite revolting behavior.
pleading a poverty of means in the situation is doubly cowardly in my opinion.
If that's the case, it IS very disgusting. You know, I think more than a few of these diplomats have questionable morals and character. This case reminds me of Herman Goering with his gluttonous taste for "objets d'art", as the Nazis devoured Europe. It's quite revolting behavior.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
That's a very fair summary of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation news broadcast by Peter Kent on April 24th 1975. I'm not sure quite why you've brought it up - watch the broadcast, you got it practically word for word. Something jogged your memory today, from when you were 15?
The "busloads of refugees ... carried to the airport [by the US] to be flown out" included some wonderful characters, though. Here's an eyewitness paragraph:
"This is where I've come after ten years," said Warren Parker almost in tears. "See that man over there? He's a National Police official ...nothing better than a torturer." Warren Parker had been, until that morning, United States Consul in My Tho, in the Delta, where I had met him a week earlier. He was a quiet, almost bashful man who had spent 10 years in Vietnam trying to "advise" the Vietnamese and puzzling why so many of them did not seem to want his advice. He and I pushed our way into the restaurant beside the swimming-pool, past a man saying, "No Veetnamese in here, no Veetnamese," where we looted a chilled bottle of Taylor New York wine, pink and sweet. The glasses had already gone, so we drank from the bottle. "I'll tell you something," he said in his soft Georgia accent, "if there ever was a moment of truth for me it's today. All these years I've been down there, doing a job of work for my country and for this country, and today all I can see is that we've succeeded in separating all the good people from the scum, and we got the scum."
anastrophe wrote: during 'operation babylift', over 3,000 infants and children were airlifted out of vietnam to be adopted out to american families"602 of the children were adopted and brought up outside of the USA, mostly in Canada. 1945 were were adopted and brought up within the USA. (Operation Babylift Report: Emergency Movement of Vietnamese and Cambodian Orphans for Intercountry Adoption. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC. 1975)
The "busloads of refugees ... carried to the airport [by the US] to be flown out" included some wonderful characters, though. Here's an eyewitness paragraph:
"This is where I've come after ten years," said Warren Parker almost in tears. "See that man over there? He's a National Police official ...nothing better than a torturer." Warren Parker had been, until that morning, United States Consul in My Tho, in the Delta, where I had met him a week earlier. He was a quiet, almost bashful man who had spent 10 years in Vietnam trying to "advise" the Vietnamese and puzzling why so many of them did not seem to want his advice. He and I pushed our way into the restaurant beside the swimming-pool, past a man saying, "No Veetnamese in here, no Veetnamese," where we looted a chilled bottle of Taylor New York wine, pink and sweet. The glasses had already gone, so we drank from the bottle. "I'll tell you something," he said in his soft Georgia accent, "if there ever was a moment of truth for me it's today. All these years I've been down there, doing a job of work for my country and for this country, and today all I can see is that we've succeeded in separating all the good people from the scum, and we got the scum."
anastrophe wrote: during 'operation babylift', over 3,000 infants and children were airlifted out of vietnam to be adopted out to american families"602 of the children were adopted and brought up outside of the USA, mostly in Canada. 1945 were were adopted and brought up within the USA. (Operation Babylift Report: Emergency Movement of Vietnamese and Cambodian Orphans for Intercountry Adoption. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC. 1975)
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: That's a very fair summary of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation news broadcast by Peter Kent on April 24th 1975. I'm not sure quite why you've brought it up - watch the broadcast, you got it practically word for word. Something jogged your memory today, from when you were 15?
The "busloads of refugees ... carried to the airport [by the US] to be flown out" included some wonderful characters, though. Here's an eyewitness paragraph:
"This is where I've come after ten years," said Warren Parker almost in tears. "See that man over there? He's a National Police official ...nothing better than a torturer." Warren Parker had been, until that morning, United States Consul in My Tho, in the Delta, where I had met him a week earlier. He was a quiet, almost bashful man who had spent 10 years in Vietnam trying to "advise" the Vietnamese and puzzling why so many of them did not seem to want his advice. He and I pushed our way into the restaurant beside the swimming-pool, past a man saying, "No Veetnamese in here, no Veetnamese," where we looted a chilled bottle of Taylor New York wine, pink and sweet. The glasses had already gone, so we drank from the bottle. "I'll tell you something," he said in his soft Georgia accent, "if there ever was a moment of truth for me it's today. All these years I've been down there, doing a job of work for my country and for this country, and today all I can see is that we've succeeded in separating all the good people from the scum, and we got the scum."
602 of the children were adopted and brought up outside of the USA, mostly in Canada. 1945 were were adopted and brought up within the USA. (Operation Babylift Report: Emergency Movement of Vietnamese and Cambodian Orphans for Intercountry Adoption. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC. 1975)
100% true to form: not a single word in agreement that what the canadians did was cowardly or wrong. a couple of hundred words to point out something negative in it pertaining to the united states. a petty headcount to point out that not ALL of the children THE UNITED STATES AIRLIFTED OUT were brought up by US families.
have you no shame? everything, EVERYTHING points to something wrong the united states did.
you are myopic.
The "busloads of refugees ... carried to the airport [by the US] to be flown out" included some wonderful characters, though. Here's an eyewitness paragraph:
"This is where I've come after ten years," said Warren Parker almost in tears. "See that man over there? He's a National Police official ...nothing better than a torturer." Warren Parker had been, until that morning, United States Consul in My Tho, in the Delta, where I had met him a week earlier. He was a quiet, almost bashful man who had spent 10 years in Vietnam trying to "advise" the Vietnamese and puzzling why so many of them did not seem to want his advice. He and I pushed our way into the restaurant beside the swimming-pool, past a man saying, "No Veetnamese in here, no Veetnamese," where we looted a chilled bottle of Taylor New York wine, pink and sweet. The glasses had already gone, so we drank from the bottle. "I'll tell you something," he said in his soft Georgia accent, "if there ever was a moment of truth for me it's today. All these years I've been down there, doing a job of work for my country and for this country, and today all I can see is that we've succeeded in separating all the good people from the scum, and we got the scum."
602 of the children were adopted and brought up outside of the USA, mostly in Canada. 1945 were were adopted and brought up within the USA. (Operation Babylift Report: Emergency Movement of Vietnamese and Cambodian Orphans for Intercountry Adoption. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC. 1975)
100% true to form: not a single word in agreement that what the canadians did was cowardly or wrong. a couple of hundred words to point out something negative in it pertaining to the united states. a petty headcount to point out that not ALL of the children THE UNITED STATES AIRLIFTED OUT were brought up by US families.
have you no shame? everything, EVERYTHING points to something wrong the united states did.
you are myopic.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: you are myopic.I could scarcely believe you'd posted the thread in the first place, anastrophe. What on earth was the point of it? Humor? An attempt to get up someone's nose? My post was an open-handed slap at the anastrophe face, not at the USA. Go on, watch the video clip, tell me where the "news" is in what you've posted. What purpose did you have in dredging it up?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: shortly before the fall of saigon in 1975, the united states voided all requirements for valid immigration documents, and took any and all who sought asylum. busloads of refugees were carried to the airport to be flown out. thousands were evacuated. during 'operation babylift', over 3,000 infants and children were airlifted out of vietnam to be adopted out to american families. most of the were orphans, or abandoned by their families because they were mixed race.
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
What a mess this was. I was a kid during this time - but remember fondly that our church sponsored a Vietnamese family that was able to get out. They came to live in an apartment in Mill Valley and the church members donated food, furniture, clothing, rent costs, etc. Best of all, one of the men in the congregation set up the father (he was young) with a job. Within a few years they were well adjusted and doing very well.
I was unaware of this Canadian story. I wonder if there ever were repercussions for those gallant Canadian diplomats?
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
What a mess this was. I was a kid during this time - but remember fondly that our church sponsored a Vietnamese family that was able to get out. They came to live in an apartment in Mill Valley and the church members donated food, furniture, clothing, rent costs, etc. Best of all, one of the men in the congregation set up the father (he was young) with a job. Within a few years they were well adjusted and doing very well.
I was unaware of this Canadian story. I wonder if there ever were repercussions for those gallant Canadian diplomats?
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: I could scarcely believe you'd posted the thread in the first place, anastrophe. What on earth was the point of it? Humor? An attempt to get up someone's nose? My post was an open-handed slap at the anastrophe face, not at the USA. Go on, watch the video clip, tell me where the "news" is in what you've posted. What purpose did you have in dredging it up?see my previous post. in re 100% true to form. of course it's an attempt to get up someone's nose, your powers of observation are....average.
as a bonus, we get to see your myopia. an apologist by omission for cowardice. second pass now, still silent on the underlying issue. unsurprising.
as a bonus, we get to see your myopia. an apologist by omission for cowardice. second pass now, still silent on the underlying issue. unsurprising.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
Well....because this is the "Warfare & Military" Forum...and posting a historical tidbit like this is appropriate - and interesting.
spot wrote: I could scarcely believe you'd posted the thread in the first place, anastrophe. What on earth was the point of it? Humor? An attempt to get up someone's nose? My post was an open-handed slap at the anastrophe face, not at the USA. Go on, watch the video clip, tell me where the "news" is in what you've posted. What purpose did you have in dredging it up?
spot wrote: I could scarcely believe you'd posted the thread in the first place, anastrophe. What on earth was the point of it? Humor? An attempt to get up someone's nose? My post was an open-handed slap at the anastrophe face, not at the USA. Go on, watch the video clip, tell me where the "news" is in what you've posted. What purpose did you have in dredging it up?
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: see my previous post. in re 100% true to form. of course it's an attempt to get up someone's nose, your powers of observation are....average.
as a bonus, we get to see your myopia. an apologist by omission for cowardice. second pass now, still silent on the underlying issue. unsurprising.So this thread is brought to us by coffee, a short temper, and a malign obsession with the insignificance of someone in Canada, this time. You're a moral leper, you know that?
I'm still silent on the underlying issue because I know too little so far. OK, you want me to read up on one 24 hour period, around April 24th 1975, in one compound in Saigon, to find out why a dozen men did something that can be construed from the outside as "despicable cowardice". You can wait for it. I'm headed out of town until Sunday. I'll bookmark the notion though, it'll get done.
as a bonus, we get to see your myopia. an apologist by omission for cowardice. second pass now, still silent on the underlying issue. unsurprising.So this thread is brought to us by coffee, a short temper, and a malign obsession with the insignificance of someone in Canada, this time. You're a moral leper, you know that?
I'm still silent on the underlying issue because I know too little so far. OK, you want me to read up on one 24 hour period, around April 24th 1975, in one compound in Saigon, to find out why a dozen men did something that can be construed from the outside as "despicable cowardice". You can wait for it. I'm headed out of town until Sunday. I'll bookmark the notion though, it'll get done.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: So this thread is brought to us by coffee, a short temper, and a malign obsession with the insignificance of someone in Canada, this time. You're a moral leper, you know that?
I'm still silent on the underlying issue because I know too little so far. OK, you want me to read up on one 24 hour period, around April 24th 1975, in one compound in Saigon, to find out why a dozen men did something that can be construed from the outside as "despicable cowardice". You can wait for it. I'm headed out of town until Sunday. I'll bookmark the notion though, it'll get done.
bye!
I'm still silent on the underlying issue because I know too little so far. OK, you want me to read up on one 24 hour period, around April 24th 1975, in one compound in Saigon, to find out why a dozen men did something that can be construed from the outside as "despicable cowardice". You can wait for it. I'm headed out of town until Sunday. I'll bookmark the notion though, it'll get done.
bye!
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
I sure hope this isn't a slap in our Canadian faces.
Maybe they had orders from higher ups to just get out? And they looted for purely personal reasons?? Perhaps it was a Cnd government order or a UN order?
This takes me back to Rawanda, and most recently the flick Hotel Rawanda. Canada wanted to save as many people as they could but the UN prevented them from doing so. Canadian Peace Keepers are limited to what they can do to save people even from their own nations. I just can't help thinking those diplomats were prevented from helping others. Just my opinion of course.
Maybe they had orders from higher ups to just get out? And they looted for purely personal reasons?? Perhaps it was a Cnd government order or a UN order?
This takes me back to Rawanda, and most recently the flick Hotel Rawanda. Canada wanted to save as many people as they could but the UN prevented them from doing so. Canadian Peace Keepers are limited to what they can do to save people even from their own nations. I just can't help thinking those diplomats were prevented from helping others. Just my opinion of course.
�You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.�
― Mae West
― Mae West
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
Oh and one other thing I just wanted to point out, I can't understand why folks insist on calling Canadians cowards.
Peace keepers go to war, and we strive to keep peace and protect boarders, hospitals, schools or anything else that can be protected by a human presence. Our solders are constantly at risk. We do not engage in combat, that is not our beliefs but.......
WE DO NOT RUN AWAY..... that is considered cowardice.
Who is braver in the face of danger the man with the gun poised to shoot and kill or the man who wishs for peace and prefers to not use violence.
Peace keepers go to war, and we strive to keep peace and protect boarders, hospitals, schools or anything else that can be protected by a human presence. Our solders are constantly at risk. We do not engage in combat, that is not our beliefs but.......
WE DO NOT RUN AWAY..... that is considered cowardice.
Who is braver in the face of danger the man with the gun poised to shoot and kill or the man who wishs for peace and prefers to not use violence.
�You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.�
― Mae West
― Mae West
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
It is an interesting topic. I looked up a few sources. Some Canadians are quite critical of the way the embassy closure happened and others say quite firmly that there really was no means of helping beyond the exit visas given. This is where the term "boat people" comes from, no? I wasn't able to find anything about whether the art was purchased by the Canadians or stolen? I wonder how they would decide which people to take and which to leave behind? There were approx 3000 visas issued, from what I read.
A Canadian woman organized operation babylift to bring orphans to Canada. She arranged with the US to be provided a large plane. She was sent a cargo plane instead of a passenger plane and, after a latch was improperly secured, some nurses and infants were sucked out of the plane and the plane crashed into the ocean. The woman arranged another plane and flew on it herself with another load of infants that did make it safely to Canada. The woman says she lives with a guilt that she feels she should have died on the first plane with them. Fortunately the children she did save help relieve some of that guilt.
I suppose my personal opinion on the issue is that it was never our war. If we aggrevated it then pulled out leaving them all behind I think some heads would have/should have rolled. It would take me longer to research the role we played in Vietnam while I would rather focus on what is happening right now. There is some talk that Canadian forces are being used outside of peacekeeping in Iraq and I am trying to find out more about that at the moment.
A Canadian woman organized operation babylift to bring orphans to Canada. She arranged with the US to be provided a large plane. She was sent a cargo plane instead of a passenger plane and, after a latch was improperly secured, some nurses and infants were sucked out of the plane and the plane crashed into the ocean. The woman arranged another plane and flew on it herself with another load of infants that did make it safely to Canada. The woman says she lives with a guilt that she feels she should have died on the first plane with them. Fortunately the children she did save help relieve some of that guilt.
I suppose my personal opinion on the issue is that it was never our war. If we aggrevated it then pulled out leaving them all behind I think some heads would have/should have rolled. It would take me longer to research the role we played in Vietnam while I would rather focus on what is happening right now. There is some talk that Canadian forces are being used outside of peacekeeping in Iraq and I am trying to find out more about that at the moment.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
I will be interested in what you find.
�You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.�
― Mae West
― Mae West
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
i did a quick check on refugees from Vietnam to Canada and how many made it here.
Boat People
This country was far more humanitarian in its response to the plight of the "boat people," Vietnamese, Laotians, and Kampucheans who fled Communist regimes in the wake of Saigon's fall in 1975. In 1979 and 1980, Canada accepted approximately 60,000 of these refugees, most of whom had endured several days in small, leaky boats, prey to vicious pirate attacks, before ending up in squalid camps in Thailand and Malaysia. Their numbers were such that they comprised 25 percent of all the newcomers to this country between 1978 and 1981, a very high proportion given that refugees normally make up only about 10 percent of the annual flow to Canada.
It was not until 1978, however, that the movement of the boat people to Canada gained momentum. Its springboard was the announcement that Canada would offer a home to 600 refugees on board the Hai Hong, which the Malaysian government had refused permission to dock. In the following year, the defeat of the Liberals and their replacement by Joe Clark's Progressive Conservative government coincided with a dramatic increase in the number of refugees fleeing Vietnam. In response to intensive lobbying by church congregations and other organizations in the voluntary sector, the government announced in July 1979 that it would admit 50,000 refugees to Canada by the end of 1980. The decision provided for both privately sponsored and government-sponsored refugees, the government initially agreeing to match each refugee that individuals and church and other voluntary groups supported. Thanks in large part to the Clark government's generous response, some 77,000 Indo-Chinese refugees entered Canada between 1975 and 1981.
this site says that the aid Canada provided (about $29 million) was co-ordinated by the US Department of State Free World Assistance Program. Combined with the story about the woman who arranged the babylift plane from the States I'm thinking that a lot of our efforts were dependent on US help and tend to believe now that we really didn't have the means to rescue people when we pulled out. At least we let a lot of them into the country when they got here.
That took a lot of time to find info about. On to something less obscure?
Boat People
This country was far more humanitarian in its response to the plight of the "boat people," Vietnamese, Laotians, and Kampucheans who fled Communist regimes in the wake of Saigon's fall in 1975. In 1979 and 1980, Canada accepted approximately 60,000 of these refugees, most of whom had endured several days in small, leaky boats, prey to vicious pirate attacks, before ending up in squalid camps in Thailand and Malaysia. Their numbers were such that they comprised 25 percent of all the newcomers to this country between 1978 and 1981, a very high proportion given that refugees normally make up only about 10 percent of the annual flow to Canada.
It was not until 1978, however, that the movement of the boat people to Canada gained momentum. Its springboard was the announcement that Canada would offer a home to 600 refugees on board the Hai Hong, which the Malaysian government had refused permission to dock. In the following year, the defeat of the Liberals and their replacement by Joe Clark's Progressive Conservative government coincided with a dramatic increase in the number of refugees fleeing Vietnam. In response to intensive lobbying by church congregations and other organizations in the voluntary sector, the government announced in July 1979 that it would admit 50,000 refugees to Canada by the end of 1980. The decision provided for both privately sponsored and government-sponsored refugees, the government initially agreeing to match each refugee that individuals and church and other voluntary groups supported. Thanks in large part to the Clark government's generous response, some 77,000 Indo-Chinese refugees entered Canada between 1975 and 1981.
this site says that the aid Canada provided (about $29 million) was co-ordinated by the US Department of State Free World Assistance Program. Combined with the story about the woman who arranged the babylift plane from the States I'm thinking that a lot of our efforts were dependent on US help and tend to believe now that we really didn't have the means to rescue people when we pulled out. At least we let a lot of them into the country when they got here.
That took a lot of time to find info about. On to something less obscure?
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/901876.stm
http://www.ottawakiosk.com/peacekeeping_monument.html
Did You Know?Monument
* More than 80,000 Canadians have served in the United Nations Peacekeeping Forces.
* In 1988, the United Nations Peacekeepers were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 40 years of tireless effort to keep the peace between warring factions. This monument commemorates the Canadian contribution to those missions.
Why blame Canada for vietnam?
http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/h ... index.html
The Geneva Peace Accords
The Geneva Peace Accords, signed by France and Vietnam in the summer of 1954, reflected the strains of the international cold war. Drawn up in the shadow of the Korean War, the Geneva Accords represented the worst of all possible futures for war-torn Vietnam. Because of outside pressures brought to bear by the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China, Vietnam's delegates to the Geneva Conference agreed to the temporary partition of their nation at the seventeenth parallel to allow France a face-saving defeat. The Communist superpowers feared that a provocative peace would anger the United States and its western European allies, and neither Moscow or Peking wanted to risk another confrontation with the West so soon after the Korean War.
According to the terms of the Geneva Accords, Vietnam would hold national elections in 1956 to reunify the country. The division at the seventeenth parallel, a temporary separation without cultural precedent, would vanish with the elections. The United States, however, had other ideas. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles did not support the Geneva Accords because he thought they granted too much power to the Communist Party of Vietnam.
Instead, Dulles and President Dwight D. Eisenhower supported the creation of a counter-revolutionary alternative south of the seventeenth parallel. The United States supported this effort at nation-building through a series of multilateral agreements that created the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO).
South Vietnam Under Ngo Dinh Diem
Using SEATO for political cover, the Eisenhower administration helped create a new nation from dust in southern Vietnam. In 1955, with the help of massive amounts of American military, political, and economic aid, the Government of the Republic of Vietnam (GVN or South Vietnam) was born. The following year, Ngo Dinh Diem, a staunchly anti-Communist figure from the South, won a dubious election that made him president of the GVN. Almost immediately, Diem claimed that his newly created government was under attack from Communists in the north. Diem argued that the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV or North Vietnam) wanted to take South Vietnam by force. In late 1957, with American military aid, Diem began to counterattack. He used the help of the American Central Intelligence Agency to identify those who sought to bring his government down and arrested thousands. Diem passed a repressive series of acts known as Law 10/59 that made it legal to hold someone in jail if s/he was a suspected Communist without bringing formal charges.
The outcry against Diem's harsh and oppressive actions was immediate. Buddhist monks and nuns were joined by students, business people, intellectuals, and peasants in opposition to the corrupt rule of Ngo Dinh Diem. The more these forces attacked Diem's troops and secret police, the more Diem complained that the Communists were trying to take South Vietnam by force. This was, in Diem's words, "a hostile act of aggression by North Vietnam against peace-loving and democratic South Vietnam."
The Kennedy administration seemed split on how peaceful or democratic the Diem regime really was. Some Kennedy advisers believed Diem had not instituted enough social and economic reforms to remain a viable leader in the nation-building experiment. Others argued that Diem was the "best of a bad lot." As the White House met to decide the future of its Vietnam policy, a change in strategy took place at the highest levels of the Communist Party.
From 1956-1960, the Communist Party of Vietnam desired to reunify the country through political means alone. Accepting the Soviet Union's model of political struggle, the Communist Party tried unsuccessfully to cause Diem's collapse by exerting tremendous internal political pressure. After Diem's attacks on suspected Communists in the South, however, southern Communists convinced the Party to adopt more violent tactics to guarantee Diem's downfall. At the Fifteenth Party Plenum in January 1959, the Communist Party finally approved the use of revolutionary violence to overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem's government and liberate Vietnam south of the seventeenth parallel. In May 1959, and again in September 1960, the Party confirmed its use of revolutionary violence and the combination of the political and armed struggle movements. The result was the creation of a broad-based united front to help mobilize southerners in opposition to the GVN.
http://www.ottawakiosk.com/peacekeeping_monument.html
Did You Know?Monument
* More than 80,000 Canadians have served in the United Nations Peacekeeping Forces.
* In 1988, the United Nations Peacekeepers were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 40 years of tireless effort to keep the peace between warring factions. This monument commemorates the Canadian contribution to those missions.
Why blame Canada for vietnam?
http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/h ... index.html
The Geneva Peace Accords
The Geneva Peace Accords, signed by France and Vietnam in the summer of 1954, reflected the strains of the international cold war. Drawn up in the shadow of the Korean War, the Geneva Accords represented the worst of all possible futures for war-torn Vietnam. Because of outside pressures brought to bear by the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China, Vietnam's delegates to the Geneva Conference agreed to the temporary partition of their nation at the seventeenth parallel to allow France a face-saving defeat. The Communist superpowers feared that a provocative peace would anger the United States and its western European allies, and neither Moscow or Peking wanted to risk another confrontation with the West so soon after the Korean War.
According to the terms of the Geneva Accords, Vietnam would hold national elections in 1956 to reunify the country. The division at the seventeenth parallel, a temporary separation without cultural precedent, would vanish with the elections. The United States, however, had other ideas. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles did not support the Geneva Accords because he thought they granted too much power to the Communist Party of Vietnam.
Instead, Dulles and President Dwight D. Eisenhower supported the creation of a counter-revolutionary alternative south of the seventeenth parallel. The United States supported this effort at nation-building through a series of multilateral agreements that created the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO).
South Vietnam Under Ngo Dinh Diem
Using SEATO for political cover, the Eisenhower administration helped create a new nation from dust in southern Vietnam. In 1955, with the help of massive amounts of American military, political, and economic aid, the Government of the Republic of Vietnam (GVN or South Vietnam) was born. The following year, Ngo Dinh Diem, a staunchly anti-Communist figure from the South, won a dubious election that made him president of the GVN. Almost immediately, Diem claimed that his newly created government was under attack from Communists in the north. Diem argued that the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV or North Vietnam) wanted to take South Vietnam by force. In late 1957, with American military aid, Diem began to counterattack. He used the help of the American Central Intelligence Agency to identify those who sought to bring his government down and arrested thousands. Diem passed a repressive series of acts known as Law 10/59 that made it legal to hold someone in jail if s/he was a suspected Communist without bringing formal charges.
The outcry against Diem's harsh and oppressive actions was immediate. Buddhist monks and nuns were joined by students, business people, intellectuals, and peasants in opposition to the corrupt rule of Ngo Dinh Diem. The more these forces attacked Diem's troops and secret police, the more Diem complained that the Communists were trying to take South Vietnam by force. This was, in Diem's words, "a hostile act of aggression by North Vietnam against peace-loving and democratic South Vietnam."
The Kennedy administration seemed split on how peaceful or democratic the Diem regime really was. Some Kennedy advisers believed Diem had not instituted enough social and economic reforms to remain a viable leader in the nation-building experiment. Others argued that Diem was the "best of a bad lot." As the White House met to decide the future of its Vietnam policy, a change in strategy took place at the highest levels of the Communist Party.
From 1956-1960, the Communist Party of Vietnam desired to reunify the country through political means alone. Accepting the Soviet Union's model of political struggle, the Communist Party tried unsuccessfully to cause Diem's collapse by exerting tremendous internal political pressure. After Diem's attacks on suspected Communists in the South, however, southern Communists convinced the Party to adopt more violent tactics to guarantee Diem's downfall. At the Fifteenth Party Plenum in January 1959, the Communist Party finally approved the use of revolutionary violence to overthrow Ngo Dinh Diem's government and liberate Vietnam south of the seventeenth parallel. In May 1959, and again in September 1960, the Party confirmed its use of revolutionary violence and the combination of the political and armed struggle movements. The result was the creation of a broad-based united front to help mobilize southerners in opposition to the GVN.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
Why blame Canada for vietnam?
Reminds me of South Park with "Blame Canada" ! :wah:
There are a lot more recent and worse things that Canadian politicos have done than this topic's post....methinks there might be a partial intent to "yank some Canadians' chains" by our host!
Reminds me of South Park with "Blame Canada" ! :wah:
There are a lot more recent and worse things that Canadian politicos have done than this topic's post....methinks there might be a partial intent to "yank some Canadians' chains" by our host!
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: 100% true to form: not a single word in agreement that what the canadians did was cowardly or wrong. a couple of hundred words to point out something negative in it pertaining to the united states. a petty headcount to point out that not ALL of the children THE UNITED STATES AIRLIFTED OUT were brought up by US families.
have you no shame? everything, EVERYTHING points to something wrong the united states did.
you are myopic.Little man, I have no problem with treating you as human. I often do. Why am I tending toward anti-anastrophism in this particular thread? Look at the thread title. It's an invitation to a fight. What do you expect? Objectivity? Move out the way when I'm passing through, I got heads to the front and the back of you. I got the world in my hands you can have it, too, I got two middle fingers and they're pointing at you.
I'm going to tell you why the Canadians failed, and then I'm going to tell you whether the Americans succeeded. Then, if you feel inclined, we can have a fight, m'Kay? This slap-post, though, is because you've insulted a friend of mine, and it's non-negotiable.
First off, then, the South Vietnamese were still poodles of the US. Whatever the US said to them went, unless you'd like to show me chapter and verse that says otherwise. Congress were rigidly enforcing their ban on US Military interference in the actual fighting, but the South Vietnamese weren't firing at US personnel. Did you know Gerald Ford was threatened with impeachment proceedings, by a significant Congressman, if he didn't back off helping the South militarily (which he had been), even at the beginning of April 1975? I can see this is going to be a ramble, I might as well include the letter. Actually, if we ignore the fact that I'm slapping you, you might find some of this interesting.
To: Honorable Gerald R Ford. April 1 1975.
From: Robert L Leggett, Member of Congress.
Dear Mr. President,
I am writing to bring to your attention a matter of extreme significance.
Recent news reports have carried accounts that American ships and aircraft, under U.S. government contract, carrying Republic of Vietnam troops with weapons from overrun areas to areas still held by the Saigon government. Such activities constitute redeployment of troops which is a basic combat support service and constitutes a violation of the legal prohibitions against participation in hostilities in Indochina.
It is my view that the present Congress would consider such activities, if continued, to constitute an impeachable offense.
I hope this question will not arise.
The humanity and heroism displayed by Americans attempting to rescue women and children from the overrun areas has been admirable in the extreme. Unfortunately the efforts have been sullied by the insistence of Republic of Vietnam troops that they be rescued ahead of the women and children. If it is not possible, short of sending in American armed forces in addition to the usual embassy and consulate guards, to ensure that no troops and no weapons will be carried, compliance with the law requires the American participation in the rescue effort be terminated. In any case, there seems to be no reason why it was necessary for a World Airways 727 to fly to Danang while a fleet of VNAF C-130s sat idle at Tansonnhut.
I urge you to give matter your closest attention.
Very sincerely,
Robert L. Leggett.Me, I think that's a bit below the belt, and Ford had more on his mind at the time, but it's well constructed.
Now, the Canadian chargee d'affaire, Ernest Hebert, and his staff. In the lead-up to the April evacuation, he and his small team issued over 14,000 entry visas to Canada. How come none of those recipients got to Canada? They were refused EXIT visas. By the same South Vietnamese who were folded over, backsides waving, offering all possible favors to their US buddies, so long as they could get out on US ships. The same South Vietnamese who didn't stop the US exporting tens of thousands of their own favorites as though uniformed gangsters were the main crop of the year. In Hebert's words, he "could not obtain exit permits from the South Vietnamese. We worked very hard to do that. This I could not obtain. They were determined to keep their soldiers in the front and fight. It was essential for them to not permit the general population to evacuate... There was nothing to stop these people getting out. Some of our embassy staff volunteered to stay behind. 15,000 were sponsored by Canadians if they could get out, we issued them an Entry visa, we had no way to get them out. We didn't have 2,000 military personnel, or an Embassy of 100 officers, or airplanes by the hundred at the airport. Canada had none of this." What I hear is a man in pain, even 25 years later when he was being interviewed.
Let's keep scene-setting for a moment. Let's not pretend, for example, that relations between Canada and the US were anything but dreadful during the 1970s. Canada was practically communist, in the eyes of people like Nixon:
"Living next to you," Trudeau told an American audience in a speech to the National Press Club in 1969, "is like sleeping with an elephant; no matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, one is affected by every twitch and grunt."
Trudeau was too much of a pacifist and a leftist for the Americans, some of whom considered him little more than a communist. He did nothing to change this perception when he said, during a visit to the Soviet Union in 1971, that the overwhelming American presence posed "a danger to our national identity from a cultural, economic and perhaps even military point of view." The Americans were amused neither by the comment nor by the locale where it was delivered.
The United States was apparently growing tired of giving Canada special treatment to protect its economy, especially while Ottawa seemed anxious to withdraw bit by bit from NATO and the American alliance system. During his visit to Ottawa in 1972, Nixon declared that the special relationship between Canada and the United States was dead. "It is time for us to recognize," he stated, "that we have very separate identities; that we have significant differences; and that nobody's interests are furthered when these realities are obscured." While the United States recognized Canada's independent existence and concerns, Canada could not expect to continue to receive exceptional treatment.As it happens, the Canadian Embassy team got back to appalled outrage for their lack of efforts on behalf of their local staff. Nobody, at the time, accused them of taking out art treasures in their diplomatic car, though. I've looked for references to that, and found none. You imply that they were profiteering? Nobody else I can find accuses them of that, just of giving up against official non-cooperation from the South Vietnamese. James McGrath, for example, went on CBC for an interview in which he expressed himself outraged that the Embassy team had been so tame. So, they were due for criticism, they got it from their own parliamentarians the week they got back, they didn't have to wait thirty years for you to heap coals on their heads.
So much for the Canadians. They tried for 14,000 and managed a big fat zero. Would they have done better if the US had backed their effort? I can't tell. I can suggest how much the Americans themselves succeeded, and how they did it, though.
How many South Vietnamese were booked for evacuation, initially? I managed to find a fair source for that:
10th April 1975, extract from Gerald Ford's briefing paper on updating The Speaker and John Rhodes on their return from China.
We have 6000 Americans in South Vietnam and we are concerned about their safety and evacuation if that becomes necessary. In addition, there are from 175,000 to 200,000 South Vietnamese who have worked for the United States, and they will be the first to go if the communists take over. We also have a moral responsibility to try and save those South Vietnamese people who have stood with us through thick and thin.Three weeks later, by the Cabinet Meeting of April 29, 1975, the actual figures achieved were discussed:
Acting Secretary Tabor inquired about the total number of evacuees.
Secretary Kissinger indicated that about 4650 have been taken out in the last two days, of which 500-600 were Americans. He also noted that although the President had directed that South Vietnamese were to be evacuated when it appeared that C-130's would be available, in the present circumstances the President's only direct order was to get the Americans out. The decision was made on the ground to include South Vietnamese.
The President reiterated that a total of 43-45000 South Vietnamese will have been evacuated.So, there we have the American success rate. 45,000 out of 175,000. One in four.
Final question, then. How did the US - specifically, Gerald Ford - do it? The answer, he got the Russians to help them out. He asked the Kremlin to call off their North Vietnamese clients, to stop the shooting until they'd got away intact. By the 24th April, Ford told his Cabinet that the Russians had acted, the North was deliberately leaving them a corridor in time, that "the lull which we have is a result of this". Without Russian assistance, the US would have had to fight their way out. Without US assistance, the Canadians left empty-handed.
Since I have the Cabinet Minutes for the revelation about Russia, you might like to have them too - they're not googleable, I typed them from scratch:
24th of April, 1975
Memorandum, for the record, of a National Security Council Meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Thursday 24 April 1975 4.35PM.
Participants: President Ford, Vice President Rockefeller, Secretary of State Kissinger, Secretary of Defense Schlesinger, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, General George S. Brown, Director of Central Intelligence William Colby, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Ingersoll, Deputy Secretary of Defense William Clements, Lt. General Brent Scowcroft Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, W Richard Smyser NSC staff.
Subject: Vietnam evacuation.
President: As you know, before we got into the Phnom Penh evacuation, we had a meeting. I wanted to know what our plans were. It took place at the right time and in the best of circumstances.
I have kept in daily contact with Henry and Brent on where things stood in Vietnam. I know the Congress has been on us on this, to get off their back. I think it is very important to stay there as long as we can contribute, to evacuate in a way that will not promote panic and to contribute as much as possible to a peaceful solution.
Now, I understand we are down from 6000 to about 1600.
Schlesinger: It has gone up to 1700.
President: I have ordered a reduction by Friday night of to 1090.
Schlesinger: That is a lot in one day.
President: That is what I ordered. There will be another order that by Sunday non-essential non-governmental personnel must be out of there. The group that is left will stay until the order is issued to take them all out.
We just got a reply from the Soviets to a request we made. Henry, give us the background and the message
Kissinger: At the president’s request I contacted Dobrynin Saturday to request their assistance to permit a safe evacuation and the beginning of political discussions and asked them to help create the conditions where this would be possible.
Oral Note: The President wishes the following to be brought to the attention of General Secretary Brezhnev.
For the past three years Soviet-American relations have proceeded from the Basic Principles of May, 1972, and above all from the principle of restraint. The situation in Vietnam has now reached the point that the United States and the USSR must consider the long-term consequences for the international situation as a whole. There is little to be gained from a debate over the origins of the present situation or over which parties must be held responsible.
Under present circumstances our overriding concern is to achieve controlled conditions which will save lives and permit the continued evacuation of American citizens and those South Vietnamese to whom we have a direct and special obligation. This can only be achieved through a temporary ceasefire.
We urgently request that the government of the USSR use its good offices to achieve a temporary halt in the fighting. In this connection, we are prepared to discuss the special political circumstances that could make this possible. We request the most expeditious answer.
Talking points:
have you no shame? everything, EVERYTHING points to something wrong the united states did.
you are myopic.Little man, I have no problem with treating you as human. I often do. Why am I tending toward anti-anastrophism in this particular thread? Look at the thread title. It's an invitation to a fight. What do you expect? Objectivity? Move out the way when I'm passing through, I got heads to the front and the back of you. I got the world in my hands you can have it, too, I got two middle fingers and they're pointing at you.
I'm going to tell you why the Canadians failed, and then I'm going to tell you whether the Americans succeeded. Then, if you feel inclined, we can have a fight, m'Kay? This slap-post, though, is because you've insulted a friend of mine, and it's non-negotiable.
First off, then, the South Vietnamese were still poodles of the US. Whatever the US said to them went, unless you'd like to show me chapter and verse that says otherwise. Congress were rigidly enforcing their ban on US Military interference in the actual fighting, but the South Vietnamese weren't firing at US personnel. Did you know Gerald Ford was threatened with impeachment proceedings, by a significant Congressman, if he didn't back off helping the South militarily (which he had been), even at the beginning of April 1975? I can see this is going to be a ramble, I might as well include the letter. Actually, if we ignore the fact that I'm slapping you, you might find some of this interesting.
To: Honorable Gerald R Ford. April 1 1975.
From: Robert L Leggett, Member of Congress.
Dear Mr. President,
I am writing to bring to your attention a matter of extreme significance.
Recent news reports have carried accounts that American ships and aircraft, under U.S. government contract, carrying Republic of Vietnam troops with weapons from overrun areas to areas still held by the Saigon government. Such activities constitute redeployment of troops which is a basic combat support service and constitutes a violation of the legal prohibitions against participation in hostilities in Indochina.
It is my view that the present Congress would consider such activities, if continued, to constitute an impeachable offense.
I hope this question will not arise.
The humanity and heroism displayed by Americans attempting to rescue women and children from the overrun areas has been admirable in the extreme. Unfortunately the efforts have been sullied by the insistence of Republic of Vietnam troops that they be rescued ahead of the women and children. If it is not possible, short of sending in American armed forces in addition to the usual embassy and consulate guards, to ensure that no troops and no weapons will be carried, compliance with the law requires the American participation in the rescue effort be terminated. In any case, there seems to be no reason why it was necessary for a World Airways 727 to fly to Danang while a fleet of VNAF C-130s sat idle at Tansonnhut.
I urge you to give matter your closest attention.
Very sincerely,
Robert L. Leggett.Me, I think that's a bit below the belt, and Ford had more on his mind at the time, but it's well constructed.
Now, the Canadian chargee d'affaire, Ernest Hebert, and his staff. In the lead-up to the April evacuation, he and his small team issued over 14,000 entry visas to Canada. How come none of those recipients got to Canada? They were refused EXIT visas. By the same South Vietnamese who were folded over, backsides waving, offering all possible favors to their US buddies, so long as they could get out on US ships. The same South Vietnamese who didn't stop the US exporting tens of thousands of their own favorites as though uniformed gangsters were the main crop of the year. In Hebert's words, he "could not obtain exit permits from the South Vietnamese. We worked very hard to do that. This I could not obtain. They were determined to keep their soldiers in the front and fight. It was essential for them to not permit the general population to evacuate... There was nothing to stop these people getting out. Some of our embassy staff volunteered to stay behind. 15,000 were sponsored by Canadians if they could get out, we issued them an Entry visa, we had no way to get them out. We didn't have 2,000 military personnel, or an Embassy of 100 officers, or airplanes by the hundred at the airport. Canada had none of this." What I hear is a man in pain, even 25 years later when he was being interviewed.
Let's keep scene-setting for a moment. Let's not pretend, for example, that relations between Canada and the US were anything but dreadful during the 1970s. Canada was practically communist, in the eyes of people like Nixon:
"Living next to you," Trudeau told an American audience in a speech to the National Press Club in 1969, "is like sleeping with an elephant; no matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, one is affected by every twitch and grunt."
Trudeau was too much of a pacifist and a leftist for the Americans, some of whom considered him little more than a communist. He did nothing to change this perception when he said, during a visit to the Soviet Union in 1971, that the overwhelming American presence posed "a danger to our national identity from a cultural, economic and perhaps even military point of view." The Americans were amused neither by the comment nor by the locale where it was delivered.
The United States was apparently growing tired of giving Canada special treatment to protect its economy, especially while Ottawa seemed anxious to withdraw bit by bit from NATO and the American alliance system. During his visit to Ottawa in 1972, Nixon declared that the special relationship between Canada and the United States was dead. "It is time for us to recognize," he stated, "that we have very separate identities; that we have significant differences; and that nobody's interests are furthered when these realities are obscured." While the United States recognized Canada's independent existence and concerns, Canada could not expect to continue to receive exceptional treatment.As it happens, the Canadian Embassy team got back to appalled outrage for their lack of efforts on behalf of their local staff. Nobody, at the time, accused them of taking out art treasures in their diplomatic car, though. I've looked for references to that, and found none. You imply that they were profiteering? Nobody else I can find accuses them of that, just of giving up against official non-cooperation from the South Vietnamese. James McGrath, for example, went on CBC for an interview in which he expressed himself outraged that the Embassy team had been so tame. So, they were due for criticism, they got it from their own parliamentarians the week they got back, they didn't have to wait thirty years for you to heap coals on their heads.
So much for the Canadians. They tried for 14,000 and managed a big fat zero. Would they have done better if the US had backed their effort? I can't tell. I can suggest how much the Americans themselves succeeded, and how they did it, though.
How many South Vietnamese were booked for evacuation, initially? I managed to find a fair source for that:
10th April 1975, extract from Gerald Ford's briefing paper on updating The Speaker and John Rhodes on their return from China.
We have 6000 Americans in South Vietnam and we are concerned about their safety and evacuation if that becomes necessary. In addition, there are from 175,000 to 200,000 South Vietnamese who have worked for the United States, and they will be the first to go if the communists take over. We also have a moral responsibility to try and save those South Vietnamese people who have stood with us through thick and thin.Three weeks later, by the Cabinet Meeting of April 29, 1975, the actual figures achieved were discussed:
Acting Secretary Tabor inquired about the total number of evacuees.
Secretary Kissinger indicated that about 4650 have been taken out in the last two days, of which 500-600 were Americans. He also noted that although the President had directed that South Vietnamese were to be evacuated when it appeared that C-130's would be available, in the present circumstances the President's only direct order was to get the Americans out. The decision was made on the ground to include South Vietnamese.
The President reiterated that a total of 43-45000 South Vietnamese will have been evacuated.So, there we have the American success rate. 45,000 out of 175,000. One in four.
Final question, then. How did the US - specifically, Gerald Ford - do it? The answer, he got the Russians to help them out. He asked the Kremlin to call off their North Vietnamese clients, to stop the shooting until they'd got away intact. By the 24th April, Ford told his Cabinet that the Russians had acted, the North was deliberately leaving them a corridor in time, that "the lull which we have is a result of this". Without Russian assistance, the US would have had to fight their way out. Without US assistance, the Canadians left empty-handed.
Since I have the Cabinet Minutes for the revelation about Russia, you might like to have them too - they're not googleable, I typed them from scratch:
24th of April, 1975
Memorandum, for the record, of a National Security Council Meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Thursday 24 April 1975 4.35PM.
Participants: President Ford, Vice President Rockefeller, Secretary of State Kissinger, Secretary of Defense Schlesinger, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, General George S. Brown, Director of Central Intelligence William Colby, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Ingersoll, Deputy Secretary of Defense William Clements, Lt. General Brent Scowcroft Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, W Richard Smyser NSC staff.
Subject: Vietnam evacuation.
President: As you know, before we got into the Phnom Penh evacuation, we had a meeting. I wanted to know what our plans were. It took place at the right time and in the best of circumstances.
I have kept in daily contact with Henry and Brent on where things stood in Vietnam. I know the Congress has been on us on this, to get off their back. I think it is very important to stay there as long as we can contribute, to evacuate in a way that will not promote panic and to contribute as much as possible to a peaceful solution.
Now, I understand we are down from 6000 to about 1600.
Schlesinger: It has gone up to 1700.
President: I have ordered a reduction by Friday night of to 1090.
Schlesinger: That is a lot in one day.
President: That is what I ordered. There will be another order that by Sunday non-essential non-governmental personnel must be out of there. The group that is left will stay until the order is issued to take them all out.
We just got a reply from the Soviets to a request we made. Henry, give us the background and the message
Kissinger: At the president’s request I contacted Dobrynin Saturday to request their assistance to permit a safe evacuation and the beginning of political discussions and asked them to help create the conditions where this would be possible.
Oral Note: The President wishes the following to be brought to the attention of General Secretary Brezhnev.
For the past three years Soviet-American relations have proceeded from the Basic Principles of May, 1972, and above all from the principle of restraint. The situation in Vietnam has now reached the point that the United States and the USSR must consider the long-term consequences for the international situation as a whole. There is little to be gained from a debate over the origins of the present situation or over which parties must be held responsible.
Under present circumstances our overriding concern is to achieve controlled conditions which will save lives and permit the continued evacuation of American citizens and those South Vietnamese to whom we have a direct and special obligation. This can only be achieved through a temporary ceasefire.
We urgently request that the government of the USSR use its good offices to achieve a temporary halt in the fighting. In this connection, we are prepared to discuss the special political circumstances that could make this possible. We request the most expeditious answer.
Talking points:
- We are not going to the Chinese or any other intermediary nor are we willing to approach the DRV.
We are going to Moscow because it is in our long-term mutual interests that the situation be brought to its conclusion in a manner that does not jeopardize Soviet-American relations, or affect the attitude of the American people toward other international problems.
If there is a temporary ceasefire, we would be prepared to convene the Paris conference immediately, or we can consider alternatives that the Soviet Union might work out with Hanoi.
During the period of a temporary ceasefire we would be willing to halt military supplies.
But we are concerned that there will be attacks on the airfields, that will make it impossible to continue an orderly reduction in American citizens.
Moreover, we have detected Soviet surface-to-air missiles within 50 miles of Saigon; any attack on passenger aircraft would create a most dangerous situation.
In light of the developing military situation, we need to know now whether there is a chance for a temporary halt in the fighting that might permit the political process to start.
We also told him specifically on Monday that we would take a serious view of an attack on Tan Son Nhut. We have received the following reply.
Delivered to the Secretary of State Department 16:00 24th April 1975
As it has already been said to the President immediately after the message of the President of April 19 was received by L.E. Brezhnev we took appropriate steps to get in touch with the Vietnamese side in this connection.
As a result of those contacts now we can inform the President about the following: the position of the Vietnamese side on the question of evacuation of American citizens from South Vietnam is definitely positive. The Vietnamese stated that they have no intention to put any obstacles in the course of military actions to evacuation of American citizens from South Vietnam and the now in fact favorable conditions have been established for such an evacuation
At the same time it was emphasized that in the struggle for achieving a political settlement the Vietnamese side will proceed from the Paris agreement. We were also told that the Vietnamese do not intend to damage the prestige of the United States.
Informing the President of the above in a confidential manner L.E. Brezhnev expresses his hope that the President will duly appreciate such a position of the Vietnamese side and will not allow any actions on the United States part which would be fraught with a new exacerbation of the situation in Indochina.This means, in effect, that if we keep the dialogs going we have an assurance against military action as we pull our people out. On the political side, the tripartite arrangement gives us the hope of a coalition solution which can be better than surrender. We will go back to the Soviets to find out what they mean by implementation of the Paris accords and to say we will cooperate. We will say we won’t take precipitate action and we assumed they won’t.
President: My interpretation is that the lull which we have is a result of this. You could assume that they weren’t yet ready and would move when they are ready. This looks like they are waiting for an agreement within the framework of the Paris accords and that we can keep our people there, and reduce them until such time as we decide to remove them.
We have been through a difficult time. It was a risk and a gamble but it was my responsibility and I didn’t want to do anything to risk the situation. I think I was right, and I will continue to act that way.
Every one should be guided by the 1090 and the further removal of non-essential non-governmental people. These are Americans, not Vietnamese dependents, who I assume are adding to the list every day in a ratio of about four to one.
Brown: about fifteen to one of the last few days
Kissinger: You asked the Soviets about American and South Vietnamese evacuation and they only answered about American citizens
Vice President: How do you read that?
Kissinger: I read that as they are tacitly saying “Get them out†but they can’t give us approval.
President: I take it to mean we can’t use force.
Schlesinger: We are delighted with such restraint.
President: But I want to do whatever is needed to secure the American evacuation. George, would you review the plan for us?
Brown: The first stage we are in now in. The second stage we would send two companies in just to keep order. If we lost the airfield we would go to helos. We have two landing zones - one at old MACV compound and one of the Embassy. We can put about six helos down at once. We would put 1100 Marines in with the first wave. The helos would come in and evacuate the 1100 people in an hour and 15 minutes. They would go back before the Marines.
President: Then the total is about two and a half hours
Kissinger: Graham [Martin] said he had a deal with the Airborne commander and he would keep order.
President: How about the typhoon?
Kissinger: There is no danger now.
President: I think these orders to Martin will get this within the 1100 required.
Clements: How many Vietnamese are we talking about?
Kissinger: We don’t know
Colby: I think we should move as soon as possible for the high risk people.
Kissinger: We told him yesterday and today to get moving on the high risk people.
Brown: I think we should keep mixing the loads - Americans and Vietnamese - so we don’t get criticized for leaving American personnel there as hostages.
Schlesinger: Henry’s message is a source of reassurance, but there are some sources of concern. Their control might be limited: there are reports of sappers going in; and reports of attempts to stir up unrest; and there are some risks of attempts to go after Americans. In light of Henry’s message, that appears manageable. A more difficult problem is population control, especially in conditions where they might have to fire on Vietnamese. You know we have favored going down to minimum levels. We should consider what to do if Americans are held hostage. We could say no ships will go into Hanoi until the hostages are released. So we should reduce as low as possible.
Colby: we have some people who are prisoners now
Schlesinger: Just missionaries.
Colby: No, also some advisors.
President: I understand the risk. It’s mine and I’m doing it. But let’s make sure we carry out the orders.
Vice President: You can’t insure the interests of America without risks
President: With God’s help.
Vice President: It takes real courage to do what is right in these conditions.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
posted by spot
First off, then, the South Vietnamese were still poodles of the US. Whatever the US said to them went, unless you'd like to show me chapter and verse that says otherwise.
Come off it spot this just isn't on. I find it equally annoying when people talk about Blair being Bush's poodle.
Leaving aside that aberational hamster substitute the toy poodle standard poodles are proper dogs and are not the sort you want to muck about with. It's an unconscionable insult to poodles. I used to regularly take mine 35-40 mile bike rides and he would still have the energy to take on any labrador, dalmation or Rhodesian ridgeback that annoyed him. He'll do what I tell him and members of my family but anyone else can forget it. stop insulting poodles the big ones are nobody's lap dog.
Little man, I have no problem with treating you as human. I often do. Why am I tending toward anti-anastrophism in this particular thread? Look at the thread title. It's an invitation to a fight. What do you expect? Objectivity? Move out the way when I'm passing through, I got heads to the front and the back of you. I got the world in my hands you can have it, too,[QUOTE] I got two middle fingers and they're pointing at you[/QUOTE].
I now have this image of six fingered welshmen making rude gestures at all and sundry either that pointing two pinkies is equally bizarre.
First off, then, the South Vietnamese were still poodles of the US. Whatever the US said to them went, unless you'd like to show me chapter and verse that says otherwise.
Come off it spot this just isn't on. I find it equally annoying when people talk about Blair being Bush's poodle.
Leaving aside that aberational hamster substitute the toy poodle standard poodles are proper dogs and are not the sort you want to muck about with. It's an unconscionable insult to poodles. I used to regularly take mine 35-40 mile bike rides and he would still have the energy to take on any labrador, dalmation or Rhodesian ridgeback that annoyed him. He'll do what I tell him and members of my family but anyone else can forget it. stop insulting poodles the big ones are nobody's lap dog.
Little man, I have no problem with treating you as human. I often do. Why am I tending toward anti-anastrophism in this particular thread? Look at the thread title. It's an invitation to a fight. What do you expect? Objectivity? Move out the way when I'm passing through, I got heads to the front and the back of you. I got the world in my hands you can have it, too,[QUOTE] I got two middle fingers and they're pointing at you[/QUOTE].
I now have this image of six fingered welshmen making rude gestures at all and sundry either that pointing two pinkies is equally bizarre.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
gmc wrote: Come off it spot this just isn't on. I find it equally annoying when people talk about Blair being Bush's poodle.No no, gmc, that's disingenuous. Using "poodle" to mean a lackey is well-established. If it bites on command, it's a poodle, otherwise it's a lapdog, so I don't see the term as an emasculation of the breed at all. The implication of "poodle" is "entirely under command". The OED gives (among others) the following examples:
b. fig. A lackey or cat's-paw.
1907 LLOYD GEORGE in Hansard Commons 26 June It is the right hon. Gentleman's poodle. It fetches and carries for him. It barks for him. It bites anybody that he sets it on to.
1944 J. JONES Man David vii. 144 There were certain barriers to progress, the greatest being ‘that Tory poodle’, the House of Lords.
1954 R. JENKINS (title) Mr. Balfour's poodle. An account of the struggle between the House of Lords and the government of Mr. Asquith.
1967 Daily Tel. 10 Feb. 30/2 Labour MPs did not appear to find the speech objectionable. One comment was that Prince Philip had shown himself to be ‘nobody's poodle’.
1974 LD. ALDINGTON Advising BBC 13 The suspicious will say that such a close link between the advisors and the advised..ensures that at least the Chairman of GAC, if not all its members, become the poodle of the BBC.
1976 Times 12 Nov. 14/4 Mr Foot is happy to act as Mr Jones's poodle in introducing the Bill.
b. fig. A lackey or cat's-paw.
1907 LLOYD GEORGE in Hansard Commons 26 June It is the right hon. Gentleman's poodle. It fetches and carries for him. It barks for him. It bites anybody that he sets it on to.
1944 J. JONES Man David vii. 144 There were certain barriers to progress, the greatest being ‘that Tory poodle’, the House of Lords.
1954 R. JENKINS (title) Mr. Balfour's poodle. An account of the struggle between the House of Lords and the government of Mr. Asquith.
1967 Daily Tel. 10 Feb. 30/2 Labour MPs did not appear to find the speech objectionable. One comment was that Prince Philip had shown himself to be ‘nobody's poodle’.
1974 LD. ALDINGTON Advising BBC 13 The suspicious will say that such a close link between the advisors and the advised..ensures that at least the Chairman of GAC, if not all its members, become the poodle of the BBC.
1976 Times 12 Nov. 14/4 Mr Foot is happy to act as Mr Jones's poodle in introducing the Bill.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
posted by spot
No no, gmc, that's disingenuous. Using "poodle" to mean a lackey is well-established. If it bites on command, it's a poodle, otherwise it's a lapdog, so I don't see the term as an emasculation of the breed at all. The implication of "poodle" is "entirely under command". The OED gives (among others) the following examples:
It's unfair to poodles hat's all I'm saying. Why not alsation or rottweiler-they also bite on command. Maybe it's the association with the french that does it.
No no, gmc, that's disingenuous. Using "poodle" to mean a lackey is well-established. If it bites on command, it's a poodle, otherwise it's a lapdog, so I don't see the term as an emasculation of the breed at all. The implication of "poodle" is "entirely under command". The OED gives (among others) the following examples:
It's unfair to poodles hat's all I'm saying. Why not alsation or rottweiler-they also bite on command. Maybe it's the association with the french that does it.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
gmc wrote: It's unfair to poodles hat's all I'm saying. Why not alsation or rottweiler-they also bite on command. Maybe it's the association with the french that does it.Now look, Jimmy, I didn't write the book, OK? As a placatory gesture, I'm sure that the image which springs to mind is the miniature, the yap-dog, that small coiffured meatball with the manic eyes, not the full-size extraordinary beast that the French use as police-dogs. Nobody treats that sort as an exercise in topiary.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
This isn't a slam on poodles or Tony Blair or anyone, but W is sort of a poodlemaker. All he has to do is nickname you "Curly," or something, and what are you gonna do? All you can do is take it smilingly and be a gentleman. Anyone who works with the man is dwarfed in his shadow.
More on topic, when I was in Malawi, Canada closed it's consulate in Lilongwe because there were too few Canadians in the country. My Canadian friend had to do his consular business through the US embassy. I might attribute the Vietnam incident to a smaller foreign ministry budget before accusing them of despicable cowardice.
More on topic, when I was in Malawi, Canada closed it's consulate in Lilongwe because there were too few Canadians in the country. My Canadian friend had to do his consular business through the US embassy. I might attribute the Vietnam incident to a smaller foreign ministry budget before accusing them of despicable cowardice.
Look what the cat dragged in.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: This isn't a slam on poodles or Tony Blair or anyone, but W is sort of a poodlemaker. All he has to do is nickname you "Curly," or something, and what are you gonna do? All you can do is take it smilingly and be a gentleman. Anyone who works with the man is dwarfed in his shadow.You make him sound quite like Stalin. I just finished Simon Sebag Montefiore's biography, your description bears an uncanny resemblance.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
MicahLorain
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: This isn't a slam on poodles or Tony Blair or anyone, but W is sort of a poodlemaker. All he has to do is nickname you "Curly," or something, and what are you gonna do? All you can do is take it smilingly and be a gentleman. Anyone who works with the man is dwarfed in his shadow.
Are you a homosexual? You sound too Adoring! I voted for him too but you go too far!
Are you a homosexual? You sound too Adoring! I voted for him too but you go too far!
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: Are you a homosexual? You sound too Adoring! I voted for him too but you go too far!I had to read that twice - I thought you were admitting to having voted for Stalin, and I couldn't quite work out an opportunity you might have ever been given!
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
MicahLorain
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
Born in '79 so I missed the Stalin era. Thankfully. I just found telequaky's adoration of Bush lusty. And Abnormal.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: Are you a homosexual? You sound too Adoring! I voted for him too but you go too far!I did not vote for W, and I haven't changed my mind. My "dwarfed in his shadow" remark wasn't intended to be flattering, but neutral. It's just the way W is.
Look what the cat dragged in.
-
MicahLorain
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: I did not vote for W, and I haven't changed my mind. My "dwarfed in his shadow" remark wasn't intended to be flattering, but neutral. It's just the way W is.
I still think you may be 'questioable' re: the Bush obsession. I am a moderate Republican that thought Bush was to.
I still think you may be 'questioable' re: the Bush obsession. I am a moderate Republican that thought Bush was to.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: I still think you may be 'questioable' re: the Bush obsession. I am a moderate Republican that thought Bush was to.Do we have a problem with poofs on this Forum? He's not got it, not for me at any rate. If I met the guy in a Camden leather bar, he'd have to buy his own drink.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
MicahLorain
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: Do we have a problem with poofs on this Forum? He's not got it, not for me at any rate. If I met the guy in a Camden leather bar, he'd have to buy his own drink.
I like Bush but dont like his ties to the Christian right . I also think our interests are not being served in two wars. We should have invaded Pakistan, where the heart of terror lies.And where Osama is!! And destroy their nuclear program. Afghan is an important battle too. Iraq Beecame an important battle now that we are there.
I like Bush but dont like his ties to the Christian right . I also think our interests are not being served in two wars. We should have invaded Pakistan, where the heart of terror lies.And where Osama is!! And destroy their nuclear program. Afghan is an important battle too. Iraq Beecame an important battle now that we are there.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: I like Bush but dont like his ties to the Christian right . I also think our interests are not being served in two wars. We should have invaded Pakistan, where the heart of terror lies.And where Osama is!! And destroy their nuclear program. Afghan is an important battle too. Iraq Beecame an important battle now that we are there.You have the example of Alexander the Great, then. Your Great Man can order what's spare of his armies to march out of Iraq, through Iran subduing the vile offspring of the Ayatollah on the way, branch right at Kabul and Pakistan is just in front. If there's enough troops left after that, perhaps you'd like to inherit India too? They have a rather more mature nuclear weaponry program that you might like to confiscate.
Perhaps he might think of hiring the Honduran army as shock-troops, first? The more the merrier.
Perhaps he might think of hiring the Honduran army as shock-troops, first? The more the merrier.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
MicahLorain
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
anastrophe wrote: shortly before the fall of saigon in 1975, the united states voided all requirements for valid immigration documents, and took any and all who sought asylum. busloads of refugees were carried to the airport to be flown out. thousands were evacuated. during 'operation babylift', over 3,000 infants and children were airlifted out of vietnam to be adopted out to american families. most of the were orphans, or abandoned by their families because they were mixed race.
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
I did not know this happened. How pathetic. Canada is just a colony of the UK anyway so we shouldnt expect much from them but cold fronts.
in the days before saigon fell, refugees also sought asylum at the canadian embassy. the day before the embassy was closed - the staff knowing it was going to be closed - the canadian embassy employees told those gathered that they'd 'have to come back tomorrow to be processed'. the next day the embassy was shuttered. when the canadians evacuated, they took two diplomatic vehicles that had been loaded with artwork and souvenirs - and left behind the vietnamese staff - including the drivers of the vehicles, who were long time staffers as well. the disposition of those left behind is not known; most presume they were executed.
I did not know this happened. How pathetic. Canada is just a colony of the UK anyway so we shouldnt expect much from them but cold fronts.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: I did not know this happened. How pathetic. Canada is just a colony of the UK anyway so we shouldnt expect much from them but cold fronts.What the Canadians need is external help to throw of the yoke of colonial oppression. You know, I bet your National Guard could manage that all on its own, since your main force is occupying ground elsewhere.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
MicahLorain
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: You have the example of Alexander the Great, then. Your Great Man can order what's spare of his armies to march out of Iraq, through Iran subduing the vile offspring of the Ayatollah on the way, branch right at Kabul and Pakistan is just in front. If there's enough troops left after that, perhaps you'd like to inherit India too? They have a rather more mature nuclear weaponry program that you might like to confiscate.
Perhaps he might think of hiring the Honduran army as shock-troops, first? The more the merrier.
Pushing the envelope a little arent you sir? Bringing down the Islamic Bomb is essential. Pakistan & Iran are the greatest threats to the free world. And I have nothing to say about the Honduras remark.
Perhaps he might think of hiring the Honduran army as shock-troops, first? The more the merrier.
Pushing the envelope a little arent you sir? Bringing down the Islamic Bomb is essential. Pakistan & Iran are the greatest threats to the free world. And I have nothing to say about the Honduras remark.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: Pushing the envelope a little arent you sir? Bringing down the Islamic Bomb is essential. Pakistan & Iran are the greatest threats to the free world. And I have nothing to say about the Honduras remark.Don't look at me, I haven't got so much as a regiment to throw into the cauldron, you're on your own. Good luck with the Pakistanis. I'll stay tuned to the news channel.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
MicahLorain wrote: I like Bush but dont like his ties to the Christian right . Bingo. The Christian right is poison.
Look what the cat dragged in.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: Bingo. The Christian right is poison.May I just ask, before claiming paid-up membership, your opinion vis-a-vis the Christian Left?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: May I just ask, before claiming be paid-up membership, your opinion vis-a-vis the Christian Left?What Christian left?
Look what the cat dragged in.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: What Christian left?You mean there's more than one?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: You mean there's more than one?Is there? I thought I was the only one. Ha ha ha ha.
The Way as Christ taught it is fairly politically neutral. True Christianity is inherently centrist. Jesus said His kingdom is not of this world.
But you want something juicy, don't you? Some of us believe that the United States is a prominent figure in Bible prophecy. There are about ten million of us that I know of. We believe that in spite of America's Christian heritage and in spite of the fact that Americans are essentially "good hearted" people, America will be the power that erects the image to the beast, and imposes the mark of the Beast mentioned in Revelation chapter 13. This is where the Chrstian Right comes in. It's a matter of the tail waging the dog. The war on terror and some natural and man made calamities will provide the situational imperatives to curtail civil liberties to the point where religious legislation may be popularly accepted and enforced. Glad you asked?
The Way as Christ taught it is fairly politically neutral. True Christianity is inherently centrist. Jesus said His kingdom is not of this world.
But you want something juicy, don't you? Some of us believe that the United States is a prominent figure in Bible prophecy. There are about ten million of us that I know of. We believe that in spite of America's Christian heritage and in spite of the fact that Americans are essentially "good hearted" people, America will be the power that erects the image to the beast, and imposes the mark of the Beast mentioned in Revelation chapter 13. This is where the Chrstian Right comes in. It's a matter of the tail waging the dog. The war on terror and some natural and man made calamities will provide the situational imperatives to curtail civil liberties to the point where religious legislation may be popularly accepted and enforced. Glad you asked?
Look what the cat dragged in.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: The Way as Christ taught it is fairly politically neutral. True Christianity is inherently centrist.I hear you say so. There's a thread someplace where it was discussed with no outright conclusion. Liberation Theology is an interesting topic. As, indeed, is Millennialism.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: I hear you say so. There's a thread someplace where it was discussed with no outright conclusion. Liberation Theology is an interesting topic. As, indeed, is Millennialism.There you go. The Christian left is way too disorganized to have any influence. Democrats are only now, way too late, learning to frame their policies in moral terms. But Jimmy Carter tried that, and it didn't work for him either.
Liberation is mostly Roman Catholic- I don't know much about it.
Millennialism is very controversial. Better played with in a thread on the topic.
Liberation is mostly Roman Catholic- I don't know much about it.
Millennialism is very controversial. Better played with in a thread on the topic.
Look what the cat dragged in.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
All you need do, telaquapacky, is to view things from outside a US context. There's a whole world of Christian Leftists working in practice, once you step aside from your local circumstances. By all means let's have a new thread for it, though. This thread is intended solely for beating our Canadian member in the hope that she never comes back.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
capt_buzzard
- Posts: 5557
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: There you go. The Christian left is way too disorganized to have any influence. Democrats are only now, way too late, learning to frame their policies in moral terms. But Jimmy Carter tried that, and it didn't work for him either.
Liberation is mostly Roman Catholic- I don't know much about it.
Millennialism is very controversial. Better played with in a thread on the topic.I'd say the Christian Far Right.
Liberation is mostly Roman Catholic- I don't know much about it.
Millennialism is very controversial. Better played with in a thread on the topic.I'd say the Christian Far Right.
-
telaquapacky
- Posts: 754
- Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:00 pm
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
spot wrote: All you need do, telaquapacky, is to view things from outside a US context. There's a whole world of Christian Leftists working in practice, once you step aside from your local circumstances. By all means let's have a new thread for it, though. This thread is intended solely for beating our Canadian member in the hope that she never comes back.The Right wing Christians are united because they're all the same. Leftist Christians in America are too diverse to unite. Yours truly doesn't fit in with either side, so I am becoming less and less political.
I sort of guessed what the thread was about. You'll have to do better than a silly premise like Canadian war atrocities.
I sort of guessed what the thread was about. You'll have to do better than a silly premise like Canadian war atrocities.
Look what the cat dragged in.
the fall of saigon: canada's despicable cowardice
telaquapacky wrote: I sort of guessed what the thread was about. You'll have to do better than a silly premise like Canadian war atrocities.You'd need to take that up with the author of the thread. He has more bees in his bonnet than would make a shopful of honey, and the sort of paranoid suspicion of "anti-American" sentiment that would make a Daughter of the American Revolution proud.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.