Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Vietnam ReportFollow

#1 Jan 08 2008 at 9:56 PM Rating: Good
***
3,128 posts
WASHINGTON (AFP) wrote:
Report reveals Vietnam War hoaxes, faked attacks - North Vietnamese made hoax calls to get the US military to bomb its own units during the Vietnam War, according to declassified information that also confirmed US officials faked an incident to escalate the war.

The report was released by the National Security Agency, responsible for much of the United States' codebreaking and eavesdropping work, in response to a "mandatory declassification" request, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) said Monday.

From the first intercepted cable -- a 1945 message from Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Minh to his Russian counterpart Joseph Stalin -- to the final evacuation of US spies from Saigon, the 500-page report retold Vietnam War history from the perspective of "signals intelligence," the group said in a statement.

During the war, North Vietnamese intelligence units sometimes succeeded in penetrating US communications systems, and they could monitor American message traffic from within, according to the report "Spartans in Darkness."

On several occasions "the communists were able, by communicating on Allied radio nets, to call in Allied artillery or air strikes on American units," it said.

"That's something I have never heard before," Steven Aftergood, director of the FAS project on government secrecy, told AFP.

But he said that probably the "most historically significant feature" of the declassified report was the retelling of the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident.

That was a reported North Vietnamese attack on American destroyers that helped lead to president Lyndon Johnson's sharp escalation of American forces in Vietnam.

The author of the report "demonstrates that not only is it not true, as (then US) secretary of defense Robert McNamara told Congress, that the evidence of an attack was 'unimpeachable,' but that to the contrary, a review of the classified signals intelligence proves that 'no attack happened that night,'" FAS said in a statement.

"What this study demonstrated is that the available intelligence shows that there was no attack. It's a dramatic reversal of the historical record," Aftergood said.

"There were previous indications of this but this is the first time we have seen the complete study," he said.


The article seems to point out that the big news is that the Johnson Administration faked the Gulf of Tonkin incident that escalted the war. I had thought this was common knowledge. The big thing to me is that the North Vietnamese had cracked US codes and used it to order friendly artillery and air strikes on US troops. On top of everything else that was Vietnam War, one thing that always stood out for me was the believable assertation that the US Military was obviously trying to cover up freindly fire attacks by saying they could find no one at fault for many of the deaths. Books and movies were done on the subject, the military lost alot of credibilty because of this issue. Now we find out that the Military may have told the truth about many of these freindly fire incidents.

Edited, Jan 9th 2008 12:57am by fhrugby
#2 Jan 08 2008 at 11:40 PM Rating: Decent
My father was in that war, and he has told me quite a bit about it, that disturbed him at that time. One thing was, American contractors (yes back then as well) were building apartments and building for the viet cong, and the US soilders were told not to fight near those areas because they were important to US interests. Well guess what happened? The "enemies" knowing this, would position themselves directly in those areas.

My point is, meh, ***** my point.
My dad's been an ******* since he came back.
#3 Jan 08 2008 at 11:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Oldest trick in the book. Literally. Sail navies and old land armies used to fly fake pennants to confuse the other side all the time.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#4 Jan 09 2008 at 2:02 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

The article seems to point out that the big news is that the Johnson Administration faked the Gulf of Tonkin incident that escalted the war. I had thought this was common knowledge.


No just a commonly held belief. Occasionally commonly held beliefs turn out to be true. Very occasionally, really.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#5 Jan 09 2008 at 6:18 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
fhrugby the Sly wrote:
The article seems to point out that the big news is that the Johnson Administration faked the Gulf of Tonkin incident that escalted the war. I had thought this was common knowledge.


Well. I think the word "faked" is a bit strong. It's not like they just made the whole thing up out of whole cloth. There was an attack on August 2nd. That's a matter of fact and has been confirmed by the North Vietnamese. The second attack on August 4th wasn't "faked", but was in all probability the result of jittery nerves, a sense that war was inevitable, and bad weather causing the sonar guys to see torpedoes where there weren't any.

The captains of both ships *thought* they were under attack. No one has ever showed any evidence to the contrary. So not "faked" by any definition of the word. They passed this information on. As more information came in, the captains came to realize that most of the attacks were shadows, however the final conclusion that was passed on the Washington was that there was an initial attack, but that the resulting hour long engagement was just the US ships firing at shadows.

That's the information that the Johnson administration had to work with. And as far as they knew there was an attack that night, after they warned the North Vietnam government of grave consequences if such an attack were to occur. What should he have done? Assumed that his captains were wrong and that no attack occurred at all?

It's easy decades later after all the facts and data has been sifted over, to second guess the decisions made that day. However, while we can question the quality of the data itself, if we look just at what was passed on the the guys making the decisions in Johnson's administration, everything they had told them that North Vietnam had just publicly and openly spit in their eye. They couldn't not respond to it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 251 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (251)