Eisenhower's memoires, on Vietnam elections 1956

[The Amer War Lib'y]

092898-10
28 Sep 1998
Newsgroups
Eisenhower's memoires, on Vietnam elections 1956

From the Webmaster:

EXCERPT: "This page from President Eisenhower's Memoires, Mandate for
Change, page 372, shows that he believed Ho Chi Minh would have won
any free election in Vietnam in 1954. This is certainly why the U.S.
did not permit such an election, though the Geneva Convention of 1954
required it..."

http://www.shss.montclair.edu/english/furr/ike1.html

<a
href="http://www.shss.montclair.edu/english/furr/ike1.html">Go to full
report</a>

-- Brooke Rowe
Vietnam War History Correspondent
REFERENCES: (Hyperlinks below)
[ amervets.com ]

The Vietnam War Master Link Resource Guide
http://members.aol.com/veterans/warlib6v.htm

Why I Am Proud I Served In Vietnam Essay
http://members.aol.com/forvets/essay/index.html

Personnel Registry Application
http://members.aol.com/veterans/registry.htm

America's largest online public-access Personnel Registry
(Over 19 million listings - Information)
http://members.aol.com/veterans/warlib46.htm

The G.I. Photograph Museum and Registry
http://members.aol.com/veterans/warlib3.htm

<a href="http://members.aol.com/veterans/warlib6v.htm">V'nam Websites</a><br>
<a href="http://members.aol.com/warlibrary/vwhrf.htm">V'nam War Files</a><br>
<a href="http://members.aol.com/veterans/names.htm">2,711,513 Served</a><br>
<a href="http://members.aol.com/veterans/warlib3.htm">Photo Museum of Honor</a><br>
<a href="http://members.aol.com/veterans/registry.htm">Personnel Registry Applications</a><br>
<a href="http://members.aol.com/veterans/warlib46.htm">Registry Access Information</a><br>

[Mike Hunt]

The Amer War Lib'y wrote:
>
> 092898-10
> 28 Sep 1998
> Newsgroups
> Eisenhower's memoires, on Vietnam elections 1956
>
> From the Webmaster:
>
> EXCERPT: "This page from President Eisenhower's Memoires, Mandate for
> Change, page 372, shows that he believed Ho Chi Minh would have won
> any free election in Vietnam in 1954. This is certainly why the U.S.
> did not permit such an election, though the Geneva Convention of 1954
> required it..."

Thanks, AWL, for the informative and thought provoking post!

[Al Zeller]

NOW we know where Hunt gets his information. Suprise, suprise.

Al Zeller

[Angus McPuffin]

On Wed, 30 Sep 1998 23:56:37 -0700 in <361327...@hotmail.com>,
Mike Hunt <mhu...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>The Amer War Lib'y wrote:
>>
>> 092898-10
>> 28 Sep 1998
>> Newsgroups
>> Eisenhower's memoires, on Vietnam elections 1956
>>
>> From the Webmaster:
>>
>> EXCERPT: "This page from President Eisenhower's Memoires, Mandate for
>> Change, page 372, shows that he believed Ho Chi Minh would have won
>> any free election in Vietnam in 1954. This is certainly why the U.S.
>> did not permit such an election, though the Geneva Convention of 1954
>> required it..."
>
>Thanks, AWL, for the informative and thought provoking post!

Thought provoking????? Mikey, m'lad, you're really sad.

Of course, as the extract said, that was Eisenhower's thoughts in
1954, pre the land reform fiasco in the DRV. And of course, you are
aware, as Phill doesn't seem to be, that the elections were to be held
in 1956, not '54.

BTW - neither the RVN or the US were signatories to the Geneva Accords
(note - NOT CONVENTIONS which are a different kettle of fish).

Looks like whoever put this up on the web is radically uninformed,
which is no doubt why Phill choose to link to it - his own vast
knowledge unable to see any problem.

But, hey Mikey, glad you found it "informative" - just shows your
level of understanding.

Col. Angus McPuffin
Fundy Defense Forces
Scot's Bay Rookery, NS

[Mike Hunt]

Angus McPuffin wrote:
>
> >The Amer War Lib'y wrote:
> >> EXCERPT: "This page from President Eisenhower's Memoires, Mandate for
> >> Change, page 372, shows that he believed Ho Chi Minh would have won
> >> any free election in Vietnam in 1954. This is certainly why the U.S.
> >> did not permit such an election, though the Geneva Convention of 1954
> >> required it..."
>

> Of course, as the extract said, that was Eisenhower's thoughts in
> 1954, pre the land reform fiasco in the DRV.

Yes, neither Eisenhower nor anyone else could tell the future. Claiming
that we knew what was best for the Vietnamese people is anti-democracy.

> And of course, you are
> aware, as Phill doesn't seem to be, that the elections were to be held
> in 1956, not '54.

Yes, I am aware. Perhaps one of:
- that's a typo
- it meant Eisenhower believed in 1954
- "Mandate for Change" is wrong

> BTW - neither the RVN or the US were signatories to the Geneva Accords

Irrelavent - the U.S. never had any intention of allowing the elections
to proceed, since we were there to "fight communism" and we could not
allow a communist to win. The RVN did not exist when the Accords were
signed. "South" Vietnam was created by the U.S. while negotions were
going on during the Geneva Conference.

> (note - NOT CONVENTIONS which are a different kettle of fish).

Yep, you're right. He meant Geneva Accords, which were the result of
the Geneva Conference of 1954.

>
> Looks like whoever put this up on the web is radically uninformed,

I think "radically" is too strong. That paragraph is essentially
correct. Maybe just crappy writing.

See! The AWL post provoked some thought and you have been informed!!

> Col. Angus McPuffin
> Fundy Defense Forces
> Scot's Bay Rookery, NS

I'll guess Craig, but I can't tell for sure.