Thursday, April 19, 2018

Đại tá Nguyễn Đình Bảo (LHNam)


Cố Đại tá Nguyễn Đình Bảo, Tđt Tđ 11 Nhảy Dù, người ở lại Charlie —

Ông thuộc dòng "Chàng tuổi trẻ vốn dòng hào kiệt/ Xếp bút nghiên theo nghiệp đao cung", anh em trong họ có nhiều người theo đường binh nghiệp.
Người bạn quen kể tiếp : Ổng là bác tôi, dù nhỏ tuổi hơn ba tôi. Ổng là người nghiêm túc, tuy rất thân thiện , xuề xòa. Hồi tôi học ở Thiếu sinh quân, có lúc chễnh mãng việc học hành, điểm kém là bị ổng kêu ra dũa, bảo phải chấn chỉnh lại. Ngày ổng hi sinh ở Charlie, cả họ khóc. Tôi nhớ ông có 3 con.
---

FBker Quân Lực Việt Nam Cộng Hòa viết :
June 20, 2012 ·
Cố đại tá Nguyễn Đình Bảo nguyên là Trung tá Tiểu đoàn trưởng Tiểu đoàn 11 Nhảy Dù tử trận ngày 12 tháng 4 năm 1972 trên đỉnh Charlie thuộc tỉnh Kontum vùng II chiến thuật trong trận Mùa Hè Ðỏ Lữa 1972. Được thăng cấp Đại tá sau khi tử trận.
Cố Trung Tá Nguyễn Đình Bảo đã nằm yên lại Charlie ngày 12 tháng 4 năm 1972 khi vừa đúng 35 tuổi.
I - Cuộc đời binh nghiệp :
Ông và gia đình rời Hà Nội vào Nam năm ông 18 tuổi thì ba năm sau, ông thi đậu Tú tài và tình nguyện gia nhập binh chủng Nhãy Dù sau khi tốt nghiệp Trường Võ Bị Quốc Gia Đà Lạt.
Trong 14 năm ở lính, ông đã từng tham gia rất nhiều trận đánh lớn nhỏ từ khắp “4 vùng chiến thuật” từ trận Ấp Bắc, giải vây đồn Bổ Túc ở những năm 1960 mở đầu cho thời kỳ chiến tranh “giải phóng”, ông đã “trưởng thành trong khói lửa” và thoát chết nhiều lần. Từ trung đội trưởng Tiểu đoàn 8, ông qua tiểu đoàn 3, rồi làm Đại đội trưởng Tiểu đoàn 1, rồi tiểu đoàn 9.
Tên tuổi ông đã gắn liền với nhiều trận đánh khốc liệt như: Năm 1965 giải vây Đức Cơ, năm 1966 ở Cheo reo, Bồng Sơn. Năm 1967 hành quân khắp vùng Thừa Thiên, Quảng Trị, từ sông Hương ra tới Phá Tam Giang, đèo Ba Giốc. Sau Tết mậu Thân 1968 thì về vùng đồng Ông Cộ, Hóc Môn, Bà Điểm. Sau đó là Tống Lê Chân, Kà Tum, sông Vàm Cỏ, Khe Sanh, Hạ Lào.
Từ tháng 5 năm 1971 ông về nắm chức Tiểu Đoàn trưởng 11 của binh chủng Dù cho đến lúc cuối ở Charlie. Nếu còn sống, có lẽ ông đã lên cấp Tướng, nhưng sau khi tử trận ông được thăng một cấp lên là Đại Tá.Trong thời chinh chiến, người ta thường nói “Một là xanh cỏ , hai là đỏ ngực” có nghĩa là hoặc chết thì được chôn cất đàng hoàng hoặc chiến thắng với huân huy chương đầy ngực . Nhưng trường hợp cố Đại Tá Nguyễn Đình Bảo ở đây, thì ông đã nát thân nơi Charlie mà không có được cả một nấm mồ xanh cỏ cho ông.
Image may contain: one or more people, closeup and outdoor

Một người con đại tá Bảo viết về Ông:
"...


Tôi không thần tượng Cha tôi từ một bài hát viết về người, cũng không thần tượng từ một hai trận đánh trong cuộc đời binh nghiệp của người, mà tôi thần tượng Cha mình từ chính cuộc đời của Người.

Trải qua biết bao thăng trầm đời binh nghiệp và cuối cùng người đã được giao làm tiểu đoàn trưởng của tiểu đoàn “Song Kiếm Trấn Ải” (biệt danh của Tiểu Ðoàn 11 Nhảy Dù), một trong những tiểu đoàn được xem là thiện chiến nhất của quân lực Việt Nam Cộng Hòa thời bấy giờ. Nhưng điều đó không đồng nghĩa với việc Cha tôi là một người khát máu hung tàn, mà ngược lại hoàn toàn, mọi người đều nhớ về hình ảnh Cha tôi như là một võ sĩ đạo đúng nghĩa: Giỏi võ, dũng cảm và cao thượng.

Thời bấy giờ có mấy ai dám đánh một sĩ quan của Mỹ, vậy mà Cha tôi đã làm điều đó khi người sĩ quan đó dám làm nhục một người lính Việt Nam (chuyện này tôi được nghe bác ruột tôi kể lại). Có tiểu đoàn nào trong quân đội mà luôn gọi Tiểu Ðoàn Trưởng bằng tên thân mật “Anh Năm”?, nhất là trong binh chủng Nhảy Dù, việc phân chia cấp bậc luôn được tôn trọng và đặt lên hàng đầu. Vậy mà trong Tiểu Ðoàn 11 Nhảy Dù, tất cả mọi người, từ lính đến sĩ quan, chẳng ai gọi Cha tôi là Trung Tá cả, mà luôn gọi là Anh Năm, và “Anh Năm” thường hay nói với mọi người trong tiểu đoàn rằng: “Tụi mày thì chẳng biết mẹ gì, nhưng tất cả tụi mày tao đều coi là em tao hết.”

“Anh Năm,
“Ngoài đời anh sống hào sảng, phóng khoáng và thật ‘giang hồ’ với bằng hữu anh em, còn trong quân ngũ, anh như một cây tùng ngạo nghễ giữa bão táp phong ba, Anh không nịnh cấp trên đè cấp dưới, anh chia sẻ vinh quang buồn thảm với sĩ quan và binh sĩ thuộc cấp.
“Anh sống hùng và đẹp như thế mà sao lúc ra đi lại quá phũ phàng!?
“Tôi về lại vườn Tao Ðàn, vẫn những hoa nắng tròn tròn xuyên qua khe lá, lấp loáng trên bộ đồ hoa ngụy trang theo mỗi bước chân. Cây vẫn xanh, chim vẫn hót, ông lão làm vườn vẫn lom khom cầm kéo tỉa những chùm hoa loa kèn, những cụm hoa móng rồng và những bụi hồng đầy màu sắc. Bên gốc cây cạnh căn lều chỉ huy của anh hồi tháng trước khi còn đóng quân ở đây, tôi thấy có bó hồng nhung đỏ 
điểm vài cánh hoa loa kèn trắng. Chống đôi nạng gỗ xuống xe, tiếng gõ khô cứng của đôi nạng trên mặt đường khiến ông lão ngẩng đầu và nhận ra tôi. Siết chặt tay ông cụ, trong ánh mắt già nua chùng xuống nỗi tiếc thương, chòm râu bạc lưa thưa phất phơ trước gió. Ông cụ đọc báo, nghe đài phát thanh nên biết anh đã ra đi, nên sáng nào cũng để một bó hoa tưởng nhớ và tiễn đưa anh.

Cụ mời tôi điếu thuốc Quân Tiếp Vụ, rồi ngồi xuống cạnh gốc cây, tay vuốt nhẹ trên những cánh hồng, sợi khói mỏng manh của điếu thuốc nhà binh quện trong tiếng nói:
“- Thuốc lá ông Quan Năm cho, tôi vẫn còn đủ dùng cho đến cuối năm. Mấy chục năm nay tôi mới gặp một ông quan nói chuyện thân mật và tốt bụng với những người dân như tôi. Người tốt mà sao ông Trời bắt đi sớm như vậy!?”
(Trích trong “Máu Lửa Charlie” của Ðoàn Phương Hải)
điểm vài cánh hoa loa kèn trắng. Chống đôi nạng gỗ xuống xe, tiếng gõ khô cứng của đôi nạng trên mặt đường khiến ông lão ngẩng đầu và nhận ra tôi. Siết chặt tay ông cụ, trong ánh mắt già nua chùng xuống nỗi tiếc thương, chòm râu bạc lưa thưa phất phơ trước gió. Ông cụ đọc báo, nghe đài phát thanh nên biết anh đã ra đi, nên sáng nào cũng để một bó hoa tưởng nhớ và tiễn đưa anh.

Cụ mời tôi điếu thuốc Quân Tiếp Vụ, rồi ngồi xuống cạnh gốc cây, tay vuốt nhẹ trên những cánh hồng, sợi khói mỏng manh của điếu thuốc nhà binh quện trong tiếng nói:
“- Thuốc lá ông Quan Năm cho, tôi vẫn còn đủ dùng cho đến cuối năm. Mấy chục năm nay tôi mới gặp một ông quan nói chuyện thân mật và tốt bụng với những người dân như tôi. Người tốt mà sao ông Trời bắt đi sớm như vậy!?”
(Trích trong “Máu Lửa Charlie” của Ðoàn Phương Hải)



Áo ào gió thu

Sáng dậy, ra vườn, thấy gió thu ào ào thổi. Mạnh, tới tấp. Ngày mai trời sang thu (chính thức).
Lá reo, hoa rơi, hơi thu quất vạt quanh người, trời trở lạnh nơi núi đồi phía Đông thành phố Những thiên thần.
Chợt nhớ thơ Đặng Trần Côn , và bản dịch xuất sắc của Bà Điểm, Hồng Hà nữ sĩ.
Thét roi cầu Vị, ào ào gió thu
Chẳng hiểu sao tâm thường yêu mến hình ảnh các chàng chiến sĩ.
Vì vẻ hào hùng của người trai ra trận— vì núi sông, vì tiền đồ Tổ quốc, vì Tự do ? Chắc nhiều phần là vậy
Vì gương phấn đấu với gian khổ, hiểm nguy ? Chắc thế
Vì kính trọng ý thức Hi sinh trong tâm nguyện các người trai thời chinh chiến ? Chắc vậy.
Nước thanh bình ba trăm năm cũ Áo nhung trao quan vũ từ đây Sứ trời sớm giục đường mây Phép công là trọng niềm tây sá nào
Thanh bình tam bách niên thiên hạ Tùng thử nhung y thuộc vũ thần Sứ tinh thiên môn thôi hiểu phát Hành nhân trọng pháp khinh ly biệt
Thời nào cũng vậy, có những người biết xem việc công là trọng, biết có khi phải thực sự phải dấn mình vào gian khổ, nguy nan để giữ an ninh cho bờ cõi , núi sông, gia đình, Tổ quốc.
Nghĩ về những người lính cũ trước 1975.
Và những người lính trẻ của xứ sở thứ hai đã và đang chiến đấu tại A phú hãn, Iraq, Nam Hàn v.v.

Monday, April 16, 2018

In that abysmal spot (LHNam)

No light can come
Voices of killing push vortex
of extermination
Blood drinking extolled in trance
Eyes bloodshot in deep raging
Killing is fun
In that spot
Reflected image of a face
of a fake heart who had so skillfully imported
KGB, Soviet evils
to redden fatherland with blood
in the name of ideology and independence

The gods cup their faces in tears
The heart is smashed
Humanity dies
Where one needs to kneel down
and pray
is here.
----
Nơi vực thẳm đen ngầu đen đó
Không ánh sáng nào tới được
Âm thanh giết chóc
đẩy cuồng nộ
trào xoáy triệt hủy điên dại- điên
Phải uống máu—
như nhập cốt đồng
Mắt tóe hận thù
Giết chóc vui ghê
Trong tối đen sâu thẳm đó
Lấp loáng khuôn mặt một ngụy quân tử,
kẻ nhập cảng tài tình
cái ác của KGB, Sô viết
về nhuộm đỏ quê cha bằng máu
nhân danh ý thức hệ và độc lập

Thần thánh ôm mặt khóc
Tim bị đập nát
Nhân tính chôn vùi
Lúc ta cần quỳ xuống
cầu nguyện
là đây.
LHN
4/2018

Thursday, April 5, 2018

More comments, critiques on PBS “The Vietnam War” (V)

Historian Mark Moyar, a long time researcher on Viet Nam, author of Triumph Forsaken: The Vietnam War, 1954–1965 (2006 ) reacts to the series.
* *
A Warped Mirror
Omissions and distortions mar Ken Burns’s Vietnam War, a missed opportunity to provide an historically honest look at the conflict.
Mark Moyar October 20, 2017
Twenty-seven years ago, Ken Burns mesmerized American audiences with The Civil War, an 11-hour documentary that took five years to produce. Forty million Americans watched the initial airing, and many more watched reruns or read the companion book. The series rekindled popular interest in the Civil War, stimulating a flood of books and battle reenactments that continues to this day.
Burns and co-director Lynn Novick spent ten years and $30 million producing The Vietnam War, an 18-hour, ten-episode production. Anyone tuning in to media coverage or attending one of the public panels featuring Burns and Novick is likely to conclude that the new documentary has equaled The Civil Warin historical and artistic virtuosity. But if one listens to American or South Vietnamese veterans of the conflict—more easily heard today, thanks to the Internet—the verdicts are less complimentary.
During the months-long publicity blitz preceding the documentary’s release, Burns and Novick vowed that The Vietnam War would not malign American veterans of Vietnam or blame them for the war, as had happened so often in the past. Instead, the film would portray veterans as patriotic Americans who answered their nation’s call to duty. The documentary would support the troops, without necessarily supporting the war. As for the war itself, the production would not promote a particular viewpoint. “We don’t have an agenda,” Burns told the media. “We’re just umpires calling balls and strikes.” So why aren’t veterans as enthused about The Vietnam War as they should be?
The foremost reason is that Burns and Novick are not actually impartial referees, but instead use the documentary to promote an agenda, in ways glaringly obvious to veterans though not readily apparent to those too young to have lived through the war. Burns and Novick wish to show that America fought a war that was unnecessary and unwinnable, and that it did so out of national hubris.
With the consistency of a jackhammer, the documentary highlights the events most conducive to a negative interpretation of American involvement, while ignoring those supporting more positive interpretations. During 1962 and 1963, for instance, the Vietnamese Communists lost nearly every battle, yet the only battle from this period that Burns and Novick cover is the Communist victory at Ap Bac. Compounding the distortion, the documentary characterizes Ap Bac as historically representative.
During 1966 and 1967, American forces inflicted hundreds of lopsided defeats on the North Vietnamese, but the six battles that Burns and Novick feature in the episodes devoted to those years belong to a small minority of engagements where both the American and North Vietnamese forces suffered heavy losses. In the battles that it covers, the documentary takes little note of the heroism of American veterans, aside from a few fleeting references. Nothing is said of the 259 Americans who won the Congressional Medal of Honor, or the tens of thousands who won other combat awards, or the many more whose valor was recognized only by their comrades.
It’s as if a football team won 150 games, tied 10, and lost 2 over seven seasons, but its video chronicler focused only on the ties and losses. The players on that team would hardly be expected to view that videographer as their supporter, no matter how much he professed to be one, and no matter how often he claimed to have no agenda.
U.S. Army and Marine Corps officers generally committed more errors in the battles where the Americans sustained the most casualties; Burns and Novick consistently emphasize these errors as evidence that American military leaders were inept. John Del Vecchio, one of the finest novelists of the Vietnam War, blasted Burns and Novick for vilifying American officers in his online rebuttal of the documentary. “I wish here to openly thank leaders and commanders of 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile) units from platoons to brigades for their leadership which was so vastly superior to what I’ve seen portrayed by Mr. Burns and Ms. Novick,” Del Vecchio wrote. “Surely I was blessed to soldier under such NCOs and officers.”
Burns and Novick restricted their on-camera interviews to individuals who participated in the war, leaving out historians, aside from those who were also veterans. The first-person perspectives are highly valuable, but sole reliance upon them is problematic when it comes to larger issues of military strategy and politics. Most of the senior military and political leaders are now dead, and thus unable to respond to criticisms from the narrator, or from people who observed the war on the ground—where they could see the trees but not necessarily the forest.
...
The fears that drove Johnson to confine the ground war to South Vietnam proved to be misplaced, according to what we have since learned about Chinese foreign policy and North Vietnamese strategy. The Chinese, it turns out, were not willing to intervene in North Vietnam or Laos, as they had done in North Korea in 1950. General Vo Nguyen Giap reportedly said that if the United States had conducted operations in Laos and North Vietnam, it could have stymied Hanoi’s war effort with 250,000 troops—less than half of what the United States ultimately deployed. It’s one of several instances where poor decisions by U.S. political leaders squandered opportunities to preserve South Vietnam at an acceptable cost. Other errors include the overthrow of Diem in 1963 and the breaking of promises to support and protect South Vietnam after 1972. The war’s outcome was not the inevitable result of superior North Vietnamese dedication or American arrogance, as Burns and Novick would have us believe, but of errant U.S. strategic choices—and, in the last case, the antiwar sentiments of American members of Congress.
Veterans also object to the production’s favorable depiction of antiwar activists. Burns and Novick lead the audience to believe that the men who stayed home and protested against the war were as well-intentioned as those who served in Vietnam, and were actually supporting the better cause. Their opposition is presented as principled revulsion at the war, untainted by selfish desires to avoid the dangers of military service. Veteran Charles Krohn, writing about the ninth episode as a guest contributor on Tom Ricks’s Best Defense blog, lamented that the episode “favors those who opposed the war more than those who fought it. Soldiers’ sacrifices seem trivialized, compared to the energy and idealism of the demonstrators.”
Burns and Novick give inordinate weight to the words of antiwar veterans, with at least one-third of those appearing onscreen having expressed antiwar views or supported antiwar causes prior to filming. Few of the series’ other veterans express support for the war—at least not in the interview segments that were aired—even though supporters far outnumber opponents among the general population of Vietnam veterans. This distortion rankled the veterans whom reporter Tatiana Sanchez interviewed for a Mercury News article. “A lot of us have a tremendous sense of pride for what we attempted to do and defend,” said veteran Jim Barker. On the New York Sun website, veteran and author Phil Jennings berates Burns for failing to include the huge numbers of veterans who “wholly supported the war, [were] proud to have appeared in arms, and sickened by the United States’ abandonment of its freedom-seeking ally.”
...
Comments Jay Hoenemeyer · There is so much bias and so many errors that it would take another 18 hour production to set them right
Vu NguyenOh right, Dr Moyar's only got a PhD and is teaching at the Marines academy, and is a specialist on South East Asia. How can he go toe to toe against you... hmmm who are you again? I mean, his view and facts are also in line with what the Vietnamese community overseas, so I wonder... maybe you have your facts from the Vietnamese government?

Bill Wells · University of South Vietnam School of WarfareVu Nguyen The good doctor may have a phd but I have a dd214 that says after 2 1/2 tours right up to mar 73, I know more about nam than he does. Con Bic. Mark Tellier · University of Central FloridaI watched The Vietnam War series by Ken Burns and came away feeling sad and angry. And very unsettled. I wasn't really sure why, until I just read this article. I served during the Vietnam era, stateside in the US Navy. Still I was very much aware at the time of how veterans were perceived and treated by anti war activists and protestors who, I can tell you, were not the heroes that Burns depicted. The soldiers returning from Nam were the true heroes. "They loved their country but America didn't love them back," wrote Goodbye Vietnam author William Burroughs. That was the message that was miss...See More

Benjamin Harjo Jr.The only heros were those who returned in body bags. A war of politics. Dennis-Penny McNulty · Centre CollegeI, too, am a Vietnam Era vet stationed stateside. I, too, was very troubled by the series, but not for the same reasons. You fail to mention that most of those returning soldiers were draftees and had no desire to be in Vietnam. I believed then and now that at least 2 of our presidents, several of our generals and several cabinet members are war criminals. Our government betrayed this country and 58,000 dead by continuing to send soldiers into battle fully knowing that the war was futile, and we could not win.

Mark Tellier · University of Central FloridaDennis J. McNulty: Good points, however the majority of Vietnam soldiers were not draftees, only 25 percent were. Reference http://history-world.org/vietnam_war_statistics.htm

Mark Tellier · Correction: William Broyles wrote Goodbye Vietnam, the author quoted in my post below. I highly recommend it for anyone who is looking for a well-written memoir about a Marine field officer who served in the Vietnam War and then returned there 10 years after the war to retrace his steps and interview the citizens and soldiers he had lived among and fought against. A positive and provocative story that helps heal the hidden wounds the war left behind... Bill Speer · Milford, KansasWhy wasn't I surprised. The Vietnam War was about people not a historical timeline. They worked hard to produce just another Vietnam chapter for the BBC World At War series.

Rockne R. Waite · Works at RetiredIf you weren’t there, you don’t know enough to talk about it!
Jeff Phillip Total and utter untruth. You're basically discounting any historian's work who wasn't at the event, when in actuality, historians who weren't there often have the best picture of what happened in an historical event. This statement is a slap in the face to a whole profession. Dale Wilson · Temple UniversityJeff Phillip Sorry, Jeff, but I taught military history at West Point for three years in the late '80s until I retired in the summer of '91. I earned a Ph.D. at Temple University, published my dissertation and had an award-winning referred journal publication as well as numerous other scholarly publications to my credit while seeking a tenure-track teaching position. Much to my chagrin, the people who sat on the search committees had all gotten their doctorates during the '60s and '70s. I quickly discovered that I had four strikes against me: I was an enlisted infantryman in Vietnam who volunt...See MoreLike · Reply · 7 · 21w John Gjertsen · Sr. Wealth Advisor at Private Wealth ManagementIntending no disrespect to any who served in Vietnam, they were actually among the least informed as far as our national objectives in South Asia. Historians have a delicate job to do when looking at a war in the rear view mirror, but they have an extraordinarily accurate perspective. Chris DownsThank you for putting into words the sick feelings I got from watching the series. Alex Adam Alexander · California State University, Long BeachI could not believe the audacity of the statements of what the Presidents were thinking, especially Nixon. It is impossible to know another man's mind, unless he wrote it down . They made bold assertations without reference
Todd Lowdon · Duke UniversityThis is an excellent review of the Vietnam War documentary. I, too, took note of the depiction in this series of the typical US soldier as lugubrious and cynical towards American exceptionalism. It came across as a stereotypical and contrived portrayal of our efforts there.

Julie Fisher Terrell · Attended University of KentuckyMy father served two Vietnam tours. Mandatory classroom current event segments/discussions during my elementary and junior high school years, '70 through '75, were quite uncomfortable knowing how my father and his buddies were treated and seeing how the news media 'reported' and portrayed the Vietnam War on a daily basis. My husband and I both agreed the program was biased. We turned the channel before the end of the first installment. May consider viewing various episodes at a later time.
Jeff Dennis · Louisville, KentuckyAlso, bombing of the North was criticized without end. Not one mention of the benefits can be found. There are multiple topics, in this documentary, for which its editors chose to rely soley on the opinions of anti-war veterans. I'm not interested in Jane Fonda's interpretation of the war fought in the skies over Vietnam. Joe SpoonerJeff Dennis, I had the pleasure of kicking Jane Fonda off my yard years ago when she was campaigning for her leftist husband Tom Haydn saying, “I love your movies but I hate your politics!” I am a VN Vet and now wish I had “mooned” her!! Joe Spooner I agree completely with this essay. I can confirm much of what is written here as a VN vet during 69-70 in Dong Ha, Hue and Quang Tri with the 3rd Marines, 101st ABN and 1st of the 5th Mech Inf. in psyops seeing both the combat AND civil affairs post Tet 68...and in the company of a native VN army interpreter. Do not believe Burns!!!Neil Newcomb · Reclining at NowhereWatching a promo interview with Burns and Novak some weeks before this mess aired and Burns said something to the effect that his family was an "anti war family". Duh... The cold and heartless, dead eyed Jane Fonda's wish for her countrymen's executions was just another day in the life of those loveable and earnest anti war youngsters. Disappointing effort by Burns.
Victor Bozich · Sub. Math & Science Teacher at Campbell County School DistrictGotta love all the open minded responses from those that were not there(sic)! Or, just watched small pieces of the documementary. Real objective? Lol. Especially, vets that never left the comfort of the states, or claimed to have served both with the army and Marines in Nam? If, you weren't there? You have no f...ing clue what you're talking about! G/2/5. 68-69. Phu Bai, Hue, An Hoa, Arizona Territory. 0311. Like · Reply · 1 · 22w

Terrie Blasi · Amarillo High SchoolI am confused...some of the things the author stated were not covered in the Documentary were actually addressed with great detail..? My father served in Vietnam as demolition expert and his experiences were harrowing to hear...but he knew how lucky he was to come home.....even to a country so divided.... Joe SpoonerVictor Bozich the cowboy: just in case you were referring to me above in saying “claimed to serve both with the army and Marines in Nam...”: didn’t see you on Mutters Ridge in Sept 69 with the 3rd Marines, nor the USS Repose hospital ship off the coast of VN, nor in Phu Bai with the 101st in February 1970....are you sure you are a Leatherneck? The ones I knew didn’t fly off the handle at fellow combatants...by the way, I was Army, ATTACHED to Marine then the paratroopers then...get it bro? Aloysius Mcdonald Interestingly I came straight from listening to Prof Stephen Hicks' presentation on the development of postmodernism and the way the philosophical relativism of the postmodernist paradigm is used by disingenuous marxists as a cover for their anti western agenda. Then I read about this pair of numpties and their constitutional inability to present anything approaching a balanced view of history and you realise how deeply and pervasively the rot has spread. For anyone still puzzled by the aetiology of sjw psychopathology, I commend Prof Hicks' 10 minute section on Nietzsche and Slave Morality. It explains the irredeemable resentment, the collectivism, the virtue signalling and the willingness to use any demographic of vulnerable people as a cover from which to attack the upstanding and honest Michael James Sherman · Teacher at International School of GenevaHow to make yourself unpopular amongst a group of Americans: say the Vietnam War could have been won.

Al Treska · Wayne State UniversityGrade B plus for the series. Some on the Left and Right may have issues with the series but I found it covered all the histortic bases well. Linda Wallace Schmitt · Fenger Academy High SchoolThank you for this, needed the balance. Bill Walker · Works at Nassau County Police DepartmentI served with the 4th ID from 10/04/67-09/20/68. And as I started to watch what was being presented. I decided not to watch anymore of it. The interviews and attitudes seemed off. And not what I remember of the men I served with. Rockne R. Waite · Works at RetiredI read some of these comments in disbelief! I have read that 75 to 80% of the people who claim to be Vietnam Veterans are not. There were a lot more cooks and clerks than infantry soldiers. So many stories are untrue! I was once introduced to Vietnam Vet who was a door gunner on a dustoff chopper. A lie! I have some hours flying with dustoff and no machine guns, they were not allowed on Med Evac choppers! It was 50 years ago and I still think I would go but I would not let my son go! If we go to war, let the dogs loose!!

Michele Schiesser · Works at Happily RetiredBurn’s Civil War also had deep flaws. He completely ignored sectional divides borne of economic differences. Instead he was wedded to racism and slavery as are most if not all liberals. Artistically it was a beautiful piece featuring original source material and compelling music and interviews. Not enough if you have little understanding of why the war took place. Like · Reply · 21w Robert French · New York, New YorkWant some perspective? It didn't take long for Vietnam to become a popular and relatively safe vacation destination. What a waste of lives on all sides. Bob French Phong Lan · Truong doiFor so many years I've been living in America where my family has chosen as our second home, I've seen PBS had broadcasted propaganda films for Viet Cong to distort Vietnam history and changed black to white, insulting the Army of South Vietnam. I've been silently ignoring them, thinking "well, there will be time they will wake up and see themselves in the mirror and they will be ashamed of themselves and they will stop making those kinds of fake news and deception to the American general public." But this time, I can no longer be silent because ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
I want to tell PBS and those...See MoreLike · Reply · 21w · Edited Phong Lan · In Episode 1, the film showed the photo of Nguyen Tat Thanh (Ho Chi Minh) in Paris and gave credit solely to him for the famous letter " "Revendications du peuple annamite" (The Request of the Vietnamese People) to the Peace Committee in Versailles. However, if the film makers really researched, they should've known the facts that the authors of that letters were three scholars : Phan Van Truong, Nguyen The Truyen, and Phan Chu Trinh (you can look them up in Wikipedia). The signed name "Nguyen Ai Quoc" was just a pen name of the whole group, and Nguyen Tat Thanh was the least educated in the g...See MoreLike · Reply · 21w Phong Lan · Who is Ho Dang Hoa, co-producer of the film "The Vietnam War" ? A Viet Cong ! ""Ho Dang Hoa, one of the students who came to the United States to study as a Fulbright scholar (and work for a while at the Harvard Institute for International Development) when Vallely and colleagues were responsible for running the program, came aboard as the Vietnamese producer for the film. As a veteran of North Vietnam’s military, he was trusted locally and had informal contacts that no outside figure could hope to assemble, making him an invaluable source for tracking down participants in the events covered in the series." https://www.facebook.com/phong.lan.3110/posts/1665219426885881?notif_t=like&notif_id=1505981957606913In the previous photo I posted, 3 Americans and 5 Viet Cong cooperated to produce this propaganda film to distort Vietnam history.
"At the Metropole Hotel, in Hanoi, following a screening of excerpts from the film for interviewees who appear in it. Left to right: Lieutenant General (ret.) Lo Khac Tam, associate producer Ho Dang Hoa, co-director Lynn Novick, Le Minh Khue (writer and former youth volunteer on the Ho Chi Minh Trail and combat correspondent), senior advisor Thomas Vallely, Bao Ninh (veteran and author of The Sorrow of War), consulting producer Ben Wilkinson, and Pham Luc (military painter).
http://harvardmagazine.com/.../harvard-experts-shape-pbs...A balanced film ??? Really ! I dónt think so! Just a plain textbook propaganda for Vietnamese communists! Phong Lan · Truong doiThis very important part of VN war history was not mentioned in the film. I don't need to spend 10 years nor 30 million dollars, let the photos speak for themselves: To all Vietnam Veterans and families, we thank you for your dedication, service and sacrifice for defending for our freedom. "A PICTURE SAYS A THOUSAND WORDS." https://youtu.be/nv_i-AUd7PQ Phong Lan · Episode 1, the film makers copied a part of the film "Vietnam" produced by the Soviet Roman Karmen's propaganda for communists about the battle of Dien Bien Phu . This part of the film was not directly captured, it was constructed when Karmen visited Vietnam in 1955 and had a bunch of Vietnamese communists to act to make the film praising Vo Nguyen Giap, Ho Chi Minh and the VC. Take a look at these following links to compare: Karmen's film at minute 15:38 to 17:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gqlLXNZyXQAnd PBS "The Vietnam War", episode1 at minute 53:37 to 54:07 ...See More Phong Lan · VIETNAM VET TAKES DOWN KEN BURNS’ FALSE DOCUMENTARY "I fought in both Vietnam wars, from the Dien Bien Phu battle in the North to the long war in the South in various capacities. Now as a living Vietnamese witness, I feel compelled to refute the shameless lie by this Vietnam War series when they praised and glorified Ho Chi Minh as a dedicated nationalist patriot." http://www.rockit.news/.../vietnam-vet-takes-ken-burns.../
(Hoi B. Tran is the author of A Vietnamese Fighter Pilot in an American War) Phong Lan · Another Vietnam War veteran spoke up: "...Those of us who answered our country’s call to do our duty in a tough place like Vietnam had to become accustomed to the overt and covert insults from fellow citizens who organized their protests and convinced themselves we had done dishonorable things when, in fact, we were doing the hardest things we have ever done while serving a purpose larger than ourselves. Not even Ken Burns and his masterful film skills can take from us pride in our service." http://thecitizen.com/.../part-2-ken-burns-vietnam.../ Phong Lan · Colonel Keith Nightingale said: "I think that the film of Ken Burns ignored the roles of American soldiers and the soldiers of Army of South Vietnam during the Vietnam War, it did not even mention about them. I was present during the Mau Than battle and I confirm that the South Vietnam Army soldiers had fought courageously during this battle, they fought as main force almost 90%. Both soldiers of ARVN and US had the high spirit of fighting and for sure, they had performed fully their duty to their most ability during Mau Than battle. The film of Ken Burns ignored this fact." General Le Minh Dao : "The Mau Than (Tet Offensive 1968) Battle was a victorious event of the ARVN. ARVN fought that battle, not the US. Viet Cong was unable to take over any city at all. Viet Cong propaganda personnels called the common people to rebel. The people ran, but no one ran toward Viet Cong's side, they all ran toward the ARVN and then they pointed to ARVN where Viet Cong to fight them back. That was the mistake of Viet Cong, causing Hanoi to think that it was prime time to attack South Vietnam."
Hai Tran Burns and co-director Lynn Novick may produce hundreds of Vietnam War films in the future, but they would be the same: The anti war movements are the winner. To tell you the truth, a Vietnamese airborne physician veteran has said in a PBS seminar: "Nobody won the Vietnam War, except the China. Wake up America !" From the bottom of my heart, for those who served for the freedom of South Vietnam, you will never been forgotten. Paul Achitoff The title of Mr. Moyar's book that's cited at the end tells us everything we need to know about his bias. It was a noble war fought for noble reasons by noble people that we almost won, and would have, if it weren't for all those damn lefties. He's entitled to his opinion, of course, but it's one held by a relatively small minority. Jim N Linda Mullen ·.Vietnam was a proxy war between the US, the USSR and China that epitomize the Cold War. It directly led to the USSR's financial and then political collapse. It even led to some of the financial problems in China that resulted in it's uprising including Tiananmen Square. Unfortunately the Chinese put down that revolution so ruthlessly it didn't succeed. The Vietnam veteran actually helped win the Cold War.
------
REF