H&M KILLS AGAIN

[DGVREIMAN]

H&M KILLS AGAIN

This is not a copyrighted article - respond to alt.war.vietnam

After President Nixon was elected and during the Vietnam war our
political leaders decided (1) to reduce American casualties by turning
over all ground operations to the South Vietnamese forces, which
included CDIG forces (a type of militia known as the Civilian
Irregular Defense Group) and (2) to concentrate on winning the hearts
and minds of the South Vietnamese people.

For the most part, the so-called "Vietnamzation" concept failed - and
it failed miserably as South Vietnam was overrun by the Communists
not long after the Americans and their allies were pulled out of
Vietnam.

Once the money, free rice, and free Water Buffalo's ran out, the Yards
and other indigenous people of South Vietnam quit their "CDIG" force
and reverted to the pathetic stone age, uneducated, illiterate
childlike tribal people than had been for centuries before. Of
course now they had automatic weapons (many of those weapons would jam
after two or three rounds were fired) and many of these stone-age
people did not even know how to properly operate their weapons, not
to mention clean them or replace parts in them.

But what was worse than bribing stone age people to fight, was that
thousands of ARVN's (South Vietnamese Soldiers) and CDIG forces turned
coat and joined the enemy, and this mass defection to the enemy
started to happen long before the Americans left south Vietnam. In
1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG
forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing
or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!

Yet today, August 2012, we Americans are being forced to experience
the exact same idiotic, ridiculous, moronic, goofy, stupid, and
fucking outrageous "win the hearts and minds and turn the fighting
over to the Afghanistan" political scape-goating, con man, "get our
men killed" political CYA bullshit once again!

In the past week more than thirty Americans and their allies have been
murdered in Afghanistan due to turn coat Afghanistan soldiers or
police that AMERICANS HAVE TRAINED! Sound familiar Vietnam Vets?

(1) We learned that turning over combat operations to indigenous
personnel in Vietnam was a complete and utter failure - and many of
these so-called "American trained" indigenous personnel actually
turned their weapons on their American instructors and murdered them -
1500 such events occurred in 1968 alone!

(2) Although we know that training indigenous personnel to fight wars
that we participate in so we can bug out for political reasons has
been a dismal failure in the past, and has led to the unnecessary
deaths of our soldiers, we are incredibly doing it again in
Afghanistan!

(3) It is clear our present Commander in Chief is more worried about
getting elected than he is about the lives of our military and the
plight of their families. No one in their right mind would want to
repeat the failures of Vietnam, especially when we experienced the
same type of failure in Iraq even before we implemented the same inept
and incredible failed tactics in Afghanistan!

I say instead of our fearless political leaders finding yet another
way to get our troops killed, if our leaders are not going to allow
our military to win the wars they so readily send them to fight, then
instead of sending them off to be murdered simply pull them out and
let Afghanistan fend for itself. We do not owe the corrupt government
of Afghanistan anything.

However, if we are going to remain in Afghanistan and continue to
fight the Taliban, then we need to allow our troops to perpetrate
total warfare, destroy the enemy completely even if requires
destroying entire towns and villages in the process (all the occupants
will be allowed to leave their towns and villages provided they agree
to be searched and placed in refugee camps) - set up our own
Government, declare Marshall law, close the borders, and this war will
be over in six weeks. And I doubt if we will lose ten percent of the
troops we are losing now due to the incredible tactic of our political
leaders ordering our own troops to train our enemy how to kill us!

So either let our troops win, or bring them home. NOW - and rescind
the order forcing our troops to train the enemy how to kill our own.
The Afghan troops are no more loyal to the USA than the South
Vietnamese troops were, or the Iraqi troops were. We are, once again,
simply training and showing our enemies the best way to kill our own
troops!

War is war, it is not "win hearts and minds after we bomb them" or
"convince them to be like America" or "tell them to forget their
religion, ignore their Mullahs, and convert to the American free
society way of thinking" - those ridiculous, idiotic and pernicious
ways of dealing with our enemies are nothing more than childlike
pie-in-the-sky political posturing bullshit by people that care more
about elections than they do about the lives our of military men and
women.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ef81f1e8-7180-41f6...@googlegroups.com...

The average CIDG striker cherished his weapon and took pride in
keeping it clean and operable. Despite the fact that the American
promise of support never materialized, a small army of approximately
10,000 Montagnards, slipped into the border region jungles and fought
on after 1975. Many were Special Forces trained CIDG, SOG, and Mike
Force combat veterans. They took with them large quantities of arms,
ammunition, and radios and the shrinking force conducted operations
against the North Vietnamese Army until the early nineties, when
survivors were permitted to be resettled in North Carolina. See URL:
http://www.montagnards.org

Mr. Rau, you are selectively forgetting all of the CIDG and
Montagnards that turned traitor? Why? Also, hiding in the bush to
escape confinement from the Communists is not "fighting on" it is
"hiding out." Where do you get this nonsense?

> But what was worse than bribing stone age people to fight, was that
> thousands of ARVN's (South Vietnamese Soldiers) and CDIG forces
> turned
> coat and joined the enemy, and this mass defection to the enemy
> started to happen long before the Americans left south Vietnam. In
> 1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG
> forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing
> or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!

If that were the case, there would be ample references to that
fact online. Post one!

I have posted dozens of on-line references to ARVN and Yard traitors,
I stoped reading them after about twenty - see my post "Vietnamese
Traitors" on this site if you want references and support to my post
above. If you want even more I have them availalble.

Obviously my post was informed, was supported by facts, and it was
clearly not racist, and speaking as someone that has probably
experienced about ten times more combat than you did, and spent about
twice as much time in Vietnam than you did, and fought in a
Reactionary Force during the 1968 Tet offensive and counteroffensive
months while you were hiding in Tailand - I guess you were refering to
yourself as a "Chickenhawk?"

If you dispute anything I said above, especially about the time in
combat, you could provide us with more details of your combat
encounters. Perhaps I am wrong about ten times more combat
experiences, perhaps it was only eight or nine times more than you?
Who knows. But as long as you keep hiding your combat experiences,
save the one time you managed to get wounded, we will really never
know will we?

Note that I underwent and passed a polygraph about my military
service, would you take the same polygraph?

Cut the bull Mr. Rau - and calling my factual report of Vietnamese
turn coats "racist" smacks of what I have been hearing lately in
respect to any and all critism of our political leaders being falsely
branded as "racism." It is not "racist" to tell the truth about ARVN
and Yard traitors Mr. Rau. What is racist about that? There were
also American turncoats during the Vietnam war, and I certainly have
posted information about them as well, so is that racist also in your
warped pea brain?

SHEEESSSSHHH - what a name calling false accusing asshole this Tom Rau
has become.

If you want to dispute something I wrote, then do so, add your reasons
why you disagree - that is called a debate - but to call me names,
false accuse me with fraudulent implied "chicken hawk" fraud, and
falsely accuse me of being a racist just because I told the truth
about Vietnamese Traitors - well, that is not debate Mr. Rau, that is
a sickness.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

news:f3b10037-f6f6-4b90...@googlegroups.com...

On Sunday, August 12, 2012 12:58:05 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:
> H&M KILLS AGAIN

> "Dai Uy" wrote in message

> Mr. Rau, you are selectively forgetting all of the CIDG and
> Montagnards that turned traitor?

There were several incidents when CIDG surrendered -- few in
which they joined the communists. Why don't you post your references
and citations regarding 1500 cases of turncoats?

> Why?

Because there were many, as my post below clearly proves that joined
the communists.

Also, hiding in the bush to
> escape confinement from the Communists is not "fighting on" it is
> "hiding out." Where do you get this nonsense?

They required a couple of NVA divisions to suppress them. The
Montagnard resistance were actively engaging the NVA, not hiding out.

Doug Says: Of course it was hiding out. The Montagnards did not
stalk and attack the North Vietnamese, it simply tried to stop the
North from imprisoning them because people like you that promised them
we would support them forever lied to them.

>
> > But what was worse than bribing stone age people to fight, was
> > that
> > thousands of ARVN's (South Vietnamese Soldiers) and CDIG forces
> > turned
> > coat and joined the enemy, and this mass defection to the enemy
> > started to happen long before the Americans left south Vietnam.
> > In
> > 1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG
> > forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and
> > killing
> > or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!
>
>

> If that were the case, there would be ample references to that
> fact online. Post one!

Just post one regarding the 1500 cases. I looked. I couldn't
find it.

>
>
> I have posted dozens of on-line references to ARVN and Yard
> traitors,
> I stoped reading them after about twenty - see my post "Vietnamese
> Traitors" on this site if you want references and support to my post
> above. If you want even more I have them availalble.

I suggested that you post one that supports your bull-shit claim
of 1500 cases. You haven't -- not here nor anywhere else.

Doug Says: First Mr. Rau, you claim that I cannot post any accounts,
and when I posted about ten to support the fact the Yards and the ARVN
turned their coats and helped the communists, now you want to see all
1500 individual accounts. Sure, right. If you bother to read the
accounts of the Yards and ARVN turning coats - just some of them
presented below, if you are rational about this issue, which I doubt,
even you must admit that trying to train indigenous personnel in our
own image has been disastrous, and continues to be the cause of the
murder of our troops in the field by the very people they trained!
This is happening again in Afghanistan to a degree I believe it is
criminal! How can we justify the deaths of our soldiers by the hands
of the very men they trained and still claim that this transfer of
military power to the indigenous people of any country we occupy is
working? That premise failed in Vietnam, as you well know, and it is
failing again. So don't you think we should stop it?

>
> Obviously my post was informed, was supported by facts, and it was
> clearly not racist, and speaking as someone that has probably
> experienced about ten times more combat than you did, and spent
> about
> twice as much time in Vietnam than you did, and fought in a
> Reactionary Force during the 1968 Tet offensive and counteroffensive
> months while you were hiding in Tailand - I guess you were refering
> to
> yourself as a "Chickenhawk?"
>
> If you dispute anything I said above, especially about the time in
> combat, you could provide us with more details of your combat
> encounters. Perhaps I am wrong about ten times more combat
> experiences, perhaps it was only eight or nine times more than you?
> Who knows. But as long as you keep hiding your combat experiences,
> save the one time you managed to get wounded, we will really never
> know will we?

We already know.

You have my official military records. I am not hiding them.
They indicate the degree of combat that I experienced. Your official
records, on the other hand, do not indicate any combat. You have
promised for years to post the corrected records that you claim to
have that would indicate that you saw some combat. You have not.

Mr. Rau, you are of course lying again. Of course my records show
that I was assigned to a very famous combat unit that had no mission,
no purpose other than combat. Moreover, my records also show I
experienced extensive combat training in RVN, and my records further
show that I was assigned to a place during the Tet offensive that was
under fire almost on a nightly basis. In fact, famous authors wrote
that "Cu Chi was the most bombed, defoiliated and destroyed area in
the history of warfare." (Their words not mine).

You, on the other hand were hiding in Thailand during the tet
offensive and counteroffensive months, and when you finally did agree
to go to Vietnam in 1969 you went to a lonely Atoll that according to
you was so quiet you did not even have any war stories to tell. Two
of the people that were assigned to the same place as you during the
same time said there was no enemy contact at the Atoll you were
assigned to. Were they lying? It appears they were telling the truth
as even you claimed the area was quiet and I cannot find any evidence
of any combat in that area during the time you were assigned.

However, your records show after you left that Atoll are you were then
assigned to Pleiku, and all I can find after your new assignment is a
record of you being in combat one time during the defense of a camp
that was overrun later anyway. In that fight you managed to get
yourself wounded. Your assignment away from the Atoll was for only
about a maximum of two and one half months.

(Now if I have anything wrong about your combat experiences, please
correct me with specifics).

Where I was located there was hostile enemy fire almost every night
for months! Now if you cannot see the difference between our two
experiences, then you need to bone up on your reading about what
constitutes combat as far as the US Army is concerned. There are
countless reports of combat in my unit, my reactionary force, and the
camps and bases where I was assigned.

I also completed a polygraph test in respect to just some of my combat
experiences, will you do the same? If you pass it I will pay for it!

>
> Note that I underwent and passed a polygraph about my military
> service, would you take the same polygraph?

You must have noticed that nobody gives a shit.

What I noticed Mr. Rau, is that you are not interested in the truth.
You are afraid to take the same test, and as we see above, your combat
experiences compared to mine are very questionable. I am not
claiming you never experienced combat, only that your experiences
versus mine, I believe, are waining in that regard. But comparing
dick sizes is not the issue - the issue is whether Yards and ARVN
helped the communists, and my post below proves, irrefutably, they
did.

>
> Cut the bull Mr. Rau - and calling my factual report of Vietnamese
> turn coats "racist" smacks of what I have been hearing lately in
> respect to any and all critism of our political leaders being
> falsely
> branded as "racism."

Lacking "factual" references and citations supporting your
assertions, your account is a lie.

I posted factual citations, many of them. They are listed again
below:

You are confused. Your racist statement has nothing to do with
current US politics. The following statement (yours) reeks of racism.

"Once the money, free rice, and free Water Buffalo's ran out, the
Yards and other indigenous people of South Vietnam quit their "CDIG"
force and reverted to the pathetic stone age, uneducated, illiterate

childlike tribal people they had been for centuries before."

Mr. Rau, there is nothing racist about the statement above. Racism
defined is:

racism >n. 1 the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or
qualities specific to each race.
-DERIVATIVES racist >n. &

I said nothing about specific characteristics, abilities or qualities
about any race, I was talking about indiginious people of a country,
which could be composed of several different races, all with different
abilities, qualities or characteristics. Now if I had refered to all
Asians, or Blacks, or Native Americans, or all Caucasians in a specifc
general derogatory light, based upon specific abilities, qualities or
characteristics, that would be racist - but to say all Russians speak
Russian, or that the Yards were a stone age people, those statements
represent historical and accurate facts about a nation of people.

You really should bone up on your reading comprehension before you
start calling people racists - or use your other false accusations -
if you disagree try to debate like an honorable and rational person
without all of the smears and name calling.

***
see below for evidence of ARVN and Yards turning coat and helping
the communists:

VIETNAMESE TRAITORS

This is not a copyrighted article. You may respond at
alt.war.vietnam.


There are so many accounts of ARVN and Montagnard turncoats that
helped the NVA and the Viet Cong I stopped recording them after about
ten sites - but here are some of the more well-known accounts about
the Vietnam ARVN units that perhaps some Vietnam Vets did not know.

http://tinyurl.com/8fulkml

Provincial Reconnaissance Units (PRU) were established in Vietnam as
an irregular guerrilla force. It recruited ARVN's mostly for its
ranks, and it was one of the most tretcherous and failed units in the
entire Vietnam war.

1. In actual fact, the PRU's served as one of the most brutal and
corrupt colonial proxies of the United States in its history. They
were notoriously ineffective in fulfilling American imperial ambitions
and participated in the torture and killing of thousands of innocent
civilians. The PRU's were trained by the CIA and USAID's Public Safety
Division as "hunter-killer" squadrons to carry out the notorious
Phoenix operation whose central aim was to eliminate the "Vietcong"
infrastructure (VCI) through use of sophisticated computer technology
and intelligence gathering techniques and through improved
coordination of military and civilian intelligence agencies. Phoenix
had its roots in earlier psychological warfare and police
counter-terror operations designed to "bring danger and death" to
"Vietcong functionaries." It employed methods such as the use of
wanted posters, blacklists, spies and disguises as well as violent
acts of intimidation and terrorism.

The PRU's partook in indiscriminate brutality and failed to infiltrate
the upper-echelon of the revolutionary apparatus. Phoenix was riddled
by inaccurate reporting, traitors and bribery. South Vietnamese
president Nguyen Van Thieu used Phoenix to eliminate political rivals,
including non-communist political opposition.

Internal reports on record at the National Archives point to the
widespread corruption of PRU cadres who used their positions for
revenge purposes and for shakedowns and extortion, threatening to kill
people and count them as VCI if they did not pay them huge sums.

In part because defection rates were so high in the US-created South
Vietnamese army, many of those recruited were criminals or thugs who
used the program to advance their own agendas.

Elton Manzione, a Phoenix operative noted that the PRU's were "a
combination of ARVN deserters, VC turncoats and bad motherfuckers;
criminals the South Vietnamese couldn't deal with who were turned over
to us. Some actually had an incentive plan: If they killed X number of
commies, they got x number of years off their prison term."

Thousands of PRU also sold key battle and unit information to the
Communists, who in turn used that intelligence to ambush American
units on patrol, or to attack American base camps.


http://tinyurl.com/9xbss3q

The Walking Dead
Autobiography - 240 pages
Our ARVN interpreters made a big show of angrily condemning the
turncoats, more to convince us of their own loyalty.".....

http://tinyurl.com/9melvnh
"Goodnight Saigon"
With turncoat Montagnards showing the way, regiments from the NVA's
316th ... Four of the Fifty-third ARVN Regiment's battalions manned
the Ban Me Thuot ...


Communist Party of Vietnam

http://tinyurl.com/9fze476

The next time anyone wants to travel to Vietnam and line the pockets
of the Communist overlords and criminals, they might want to see what
the Vietnamese people are saying about their government.


http://tinyurl.com/7gcbku

A key North Vietnamese defector, a member of the ruling Communist
party in Vietnam, confirmed that Cubans, Russians, Chinese and other
Communist block nations had provided advisors that fought along side
the Viet Cong. (Doctor Dang Tan, an official of the North Vietnamese
Defense Ministry was the defector). In fact, some reports stated that
officers in charge of Viet Cong units were either Chinese, Cuban or
Russian.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

news:b9f7c6dc-e11f-4fd0...@googlegroups.com...
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 3:58:15 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:

- - - - - [nothing of consequence deleted] - - - - -

Much of consequence was deleted by Mr. Rau - his hiding key and
salient facts then asking for them again, is,well, what did Einstien
say about someone doing the same thing over and over and expecting
different results?

Just post a citation supporting your assertion of 1500 incidents
of CIDG turncoats.

Mr. Rau, we both know (1) I did not limit my 1500 turncoats to nothing
but CIDG - (2) I have already posted several references (you snipped
them out -I replaced them - see above) that proves THOUSANDS of
Yards, CIDG and ARVN combined turned coat - my God man some of the
ARVN officers actually were working for the NVA and they were hailed
as heros after the fall of Saigon. . .

Your citations regarding the effectiveness of the PRUs, the fact
that the NVA, Cubans, Russians, and Chinese were communists, has
nothing to do with imaginary CIDG turncoats. Neither does your
"Walking Dead" citation which apparently is pure bull-shit, (Read the
readers' reviews at Amazon).

Mr. Rau, you asked for references. I provided several. And the
Walking Dead issue has nothing to do with ARVN, CDIG and Yard turn
coats. And the issue was not that Cubans, Russians and Chinese were
communists, hell we all know that already. The point was, which you
apparently missed, was that soldiers from those Nations were fighting
with the NVA and Viet Cong Communists, which you have denied in the
past. If you believe the "Walking Dead" book was fiction, then since
I do not have any evidence to the contrary, I will accept your
analysis and I hereby remove that single reference from my body of
references you howled for - one down, fifty up.

Mr. Rau, you have a tendancy to "alter" "modify" and "manipulate" what
I say, (you snip it out so your false claims will not be so obvious)
and then you demand proof for your own "alterations" "modifications"
and/or "manipulations" of what I posted. . . .if you are going to
change what I say into something different than what I actually said,
then perhaps you should answer your own stupid questions?

Where did you learn to debate, "Frauds R Us" U? See my post above
"Vietnamese Traitors."

Apparently, every combat vet that reviewed it says that it is
bull-shit.

Nope, Mr. Rau, it was a combat vet that wrote it. But I cannot verify
the "Walking Dead" accuracy Mr. Rau. Do you now want me to verify the
accuracy of every single reference I post that disagree's with you?
How in the hell am I supposed to do that? I already said you can
dismiss the Walking Dead book, as it is only one of many references
that proves CIDG, ARVN and Yards turned coat and worked with the
communists.

You know, it's sort of like your Walter Mitty tales that caused
everyone to call bull-shit, and me to doubt that you had even served
in country�

Mr. Rau, you fraudulently claimed I dodged Vietnam becuase I refused
to jump through your hoop and comply with your demands to post my
historical assignments and other private information on a public
forum. . . at least that was the excuse you posted at the time. You
simply lied about my service, and admitted you lied when you were
caught when some of my records were released to Nigel Brooks.

Moreover, we both know there were no Walter Mtty tales - only your
fraudulant changing and framing what I said out of context, meaning
and nature. Then you used your own fraudulent "re-writes" of what I
said to claim that I was lying. That tactic is a fraudulent and con
man tactic Mr. Rau, and if you are now claiming you based your other
lies about me and my service on your own "framed cons and fraud" then
that is nothing more than yet another unbelievable con and fraud
coming from you Mr. Rau.

You lie so much, and so often about me, I am being to think you are
pathological, or you were perhaps shot in the head when you were
wounded? I also notice you duck my questions about your combat
experiences, my polygraph, and the assignements to units my records
clearly prove that were involved in nothing but combat. . . great
dodging and ducking, which is good for your typical "Walter Mitty"
fraud I suspect.

Why don't you stop the false accusations, name calling, and other
fraud you dream up and try to debate an issue like the former reserve
junior officer OCS grad you once were? Don't you remember the "Honor
Code" Mr. Rau?

Post a citation supporting your assertion of 1500 incidents of
CIDG turncoats. And while your at it, why don't you reveal those
declassified and corrected records of yours.

***

I am not gong to list 1500 different citations on this forum you
wobbling nincompoop. They are easy to find, do a search and get back
to me if you cannot find them. I will post more if you cannot
complete simple searches. Also, my statement was not limited to CIDG,
you changed what I said. . . typical Tom Rau deception. . .

Mr. Rau, in respect to your demand for my military records, you duck
my simple questions about your combat experiences (at the lonely
Atoll you were guarding and elsewhere) and now you want me to list all
of my military records on a public forum? Does the word "hypocrite"
mean anything to to you MR. Rau?

Also, I mentioned before the US Army has recently changed my DD 214 to
add another 12 months of USAPAC overseas service - you even
acknowledged that post with a reply. So I have (1) provided documents
to experts, (2) underwent polygraphs (3) allowed reviews of my
military service by several independent military experts (4) allowed
and authorized a review of my service documents and my life by lawyers
and US Attorney's - and yet you won't even answer a single question
about your alleged combat experience at a place you previously said
had none. . .

So if there is any Walter Mitty bullshit around here I suspect it is
coming from you.

I also underwent a grueling polygraph examination conducted by the
most prestigious polygraph company in the world, administered by a
former (real) Federal Agent, and I passed it completely. There were
several questions out of the 79 questions that were asked me that
dealt with my Vietnam experiences. I then offered you the opportunity
to take the same test, even at my expense, and you duck, run and pee
your panties each time I make that offer. So who is bullshitting whom
about military records and experiences?

Here is the polygraph I took, all questions and answers:


http://tinyurl.com/3f6532w MY POLYGRAPH MOST RELIABLE EVER! -
Supreme Court and CIA confirm validity of my Polygraph!

If Mr. Rau denies all of his lies and fraud he posted about me, I will
be glad to post a listing of them. What I believe is Mr. Rau is
pissed at me for exposing the failures of the CDIG, Yards, and ARVN in
Vietnam.

His job in Vietnam was to help train CDIG and Yards. Based upon his
past posts about those groups I believe MR. Rau might have went native
and somehow became too involved or too close with some of those
groups.

No doubt he loves them, and cherishes his time with them. I too feel
sympathy for them but for a different reason. I recognize they were
manipulated and deceived by US Politicians, and members of our
military were forced to do those corrupt politician's bidding. I
don't blame them for turning their coats as everything they were
fighting for was corrupt, the US politicians running the war, and
certainly the South Vietnamese Government.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

in country…

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:b9c0af84-32dc-4e0b...@googlegroups.com...

On Friday, August 17, 2012 9:28:43 AM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:

> "Dai Uy" wrote in message

> news:b9f7c6dc-e11f-4fd0...@googlegroups.com...
> On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 3:58:15 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:
>
> - - - - - [nothing of consequence deleted] - - - - -
>
> Much of consequence was deleted by Mr. Rau - his hiding key and
> salient facts then asking for them again, is,well, what did Einstien
> say about someone doing the same thing over and over and expecting
> different results?
>
> Just post a citation supporting your assertion of 1500
> incidents
> of CIDG turncoats.
>

> Mr. Rau, you asked for references. I provided several.

None of which, by your own admission support your assertion.

"Thousands of ARVN's (South Vietnamese Soldiers) and CDIG forces

turned coat and joined the enemy, and this mass defection to the enemy
started to happen long before the Americans left south Vietnam. In
1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG
forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing
or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!"

> You lie so much, and so often about me, I am being to think you are
> pathological, or you were perhaps shot in the head when you were
> wounded?

Thatʻs your best shot? Tell us about the times you were wounded
and almost lost your life.

>
> Post a citation supporting your assertion of 1500 incidents of
> CIDG turncoats. And while your at it, why don't you reveal those
> declassified and corrected records of yours.
>
> ***
>
> I am not gong to list 1500 different citations on this forum you
> wobbling nincompoop. They are easy to find, do a search and get
> back
> to me if you cannot find them. I will post more if you cannot
> complete simple searches. Also, my statement was not limited to
> CIDG,
> you changed what I said. . . typical Tom Rau deception. . .

Hereʻs what you posted:

"In 1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's,
CDIG forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and
killing or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!"

Post a citation to support those assertions. I looked, I canʻt
find one.

Mr. Rau, if you read above you changed what I said into CDIG forces
only - at least this time you are now stating precisely what I said.
I listed several references above that prove these various Vietnamese
forces turned coat and helped the Communists kill Americans. You
need to read them, not snip them out and then claim they do not exist.
However, if you want more, just keep asking and I will post more
proof - which I suspect you will snip out and then claim I never
posted. See above for what you are trying to hide.

>
> Mr. Rau, in respect to your demand for my military records, you
> duck
> my simple questions about your combat experiences (at the lonely
> Atoll you were guarding and elsewhere) and now you want me to list
> all
> of my military records on a public forum?

Doug, you are the one claiming to have recently received your
declassified and corrected records attesting to your exploits.
Although it is not unreasonable to want to know what the changes might
be, you wonʻt post them, be cause they do not exist any more that 1500
cases of ARVN/CIDG turncoats in 1968. 1500 cases!. You have my
military records describing duties, assignments, schools, awards and
decorations, all revealing my military and combat experience -- there
are no recent declassifications or corrections. What more do you
want?

Post the references, or STFU.

Mr. Rau, please post where I said I recently received anything
declassified? I did say the US Army changed my DD 214 to add another
12 months of overseas service. But there was nothing mentioned,
insinuated or said in any of my posts about this issue that service
was classified? Do you dream this shit up as you go along, or do you
sit down and try to figure out how you can get caught in yet another
lie about me on line? Please a post reference about me ever saying
anything about "recent classified records" - I say you are nuts and I
never said anything remotely near what you are claiming I said.

Mr. Rau, your FOIA records do not show, and never will, how many
combat experiences, and where, you might have had.

In fact the NPRC states on their web site the FOIA records they
provide DO NOT and CANNOT provide information about combat
experiences.

The only way to know that is for the veteran to state (1) where he was
assigned, (2) when, and (3) with which units, and (4) what his duties
were at the time.

I know you were not in Vietnam during the Tet offensive and
counteroffensive months. I know you were assigned to a lonely Atoll
where there is no record of any combat events that I could find. I
have also spoke with two people that were assigned to the same Atoll
at the same time you were and they said "no enemy contact." But they
and I could be wrong - so I offered you the opportunity to correct
those opinions.

If you continue to refuse to correct the statements and opinions I
mentioned above, then I must assume they are correct. I know you
were in combat and under fire one time, which was the relief of Dak
Tho - other than that I cannot find any other combat events - but
then if you want to give me dates, units, names of some of the men
that fought with you, like I have, then I will investigate further.
But if you keep stonewalling, then I will assume my investigation in
regards to this issue is correct - which is not to say anything
demeaning to your service - you were under fire, and that means
combat, but since you insist on measuring dicks in respect to calling
me a "Chickenhawk" and lying about my combat experiences, that is the
only reason I am even bringing this issue up. I really could care
less about your combat experiences, but when you call me "Chickenhawk"
although you know I experienced much more combat than you did - then
I cannot help but point out your hypocrisy.

Stop the name calling, false accusations, and dick size challenges
and perhaps we can get to the meat of an issue. If you really believe
that none of the Vietnamese forces I mentioned above ever turned coat
and helped the communists then say so and I will post more proof than
I have already above.

Also, you miss the point. You cannot agree with what is going on in
Afghanistan in respect to training those people? It is clear to me
we are training them to kill us, just like we did in Vietnam.

I don't know why you always seem so upset with everything I say - is
it because I outrank you in the Regular Army?

Doug Grant (Tm)
***

[DGVREIMAN]

news:83afa458-c7b1-4088...@googlegroups.com...

>> Post the references, or STFU.

You wonʻt do either.

***

Doug Says: Mr. Rau, see below. I have no idea why you debate with
name calling and false accusations. You might contribute something to
this NG if you would just stop the personal attacks. I have no
problem with you disagreeing with something I say, or even asking for
references. I do have a problem with the name calling and the false
accusations that go along with it.

FAILED AFGHAN POLICY

this is not a copyrighted article. You may replay at alt.war.vietnam


The policy of training Afghans to become soldier allies is failing.
But that is no surprise because that same policy has failed in every
war we have attempted to use it. See below:

Finally, Tom Rau (Dai Uy) has admitted he lied about what I said about
1500 Vietnamese traitors in 1968 alone, and he finally, with much
urging, posted an accurate excerpt of what I actually did say about
this issue. Yet with that said, he again falsely claimed that no
figures or references exist to prove my statement that our "wins the
hearts and minds" in Vietnam was also a miserable failure.

However, read below what he posted before he was, once again, forced
to admit the truth about what I really did say:

Tom Rau (Dai Uy) replied to my statement there were 1500 Vietnamese
traitors that helped the communists kill Americans in 1968 alone with:

"If that were the case, there would be ample references to that fact
online. Post one!
"Just post one regarding the 1500 cases. I looked. I couldn't find
it."

"I suggested that you post one that supports your bull-shit claim
of 1500 cases. You haven't -- not here nor anywhere else."

Then Mr. Rau, as usual attempted to "re-write" what I had actually
said with his distorted and fraudulent version with:

"There were several incidents when CIDG surrendered -- few in which
they joined the communists. Why don't you post your references and
citations regarding 1500 cases of turncoats?

Why?

"I suggested that you post one that supports your bull-shit claim of
1500 cases. You haven't -- not here nor anywhere else."

Dai Uy

Note first that for some strange reason (I often opine the reason is
that he was shot in the head but I really do not know for sure) Mr.
Rau is (1) distorting what I said by isolating the Vietnamese
turncoats to CDIG personnel only, and (2) claiming I never posted any
references and citations regarding the Vietnamese Traitors, while he
conveniently ignored all of the references I posted under my post
"Vietnamese Traitors" which of course Mr. Rau snipped out.

Here is what I did post about this issue and the 1500 events:

"In 1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG
forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing
or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!"

Note that I included Chieu Hoi's, CDIG forces and/or ARVN'[s turning
on American soldiers and killing them or helping the enemy to kill
them! 1500 events!

However, regardless of Mr. Rau (Dai Uy) being caught yet again lying
about something I had previously posted, he still demanded even more
references to support my statement about Vietnamese traitors -
meanwhile he snipped out the ones I had already posted and then
outrageously claimed I had posted none! (Like I said, he was probably
shot in the head).

I am sure he will try to hide the references and absolute proof of my
1500 traitors in 1968 alone I will list below. Then he will again
claim I never posted any - which is SOP for Tom Rau if you have ever
encountered him previously on this forum.

I suspect, but I cannot prove, that sometime in the past he was shot
in the head - hard. But like I said before, that is just my opinion I
have been forced to conclude over the years due to the bizarre,
distorted, false and twisted responses I see this man post about my
articles and posts.

However, regardless of all the subterfuge, I shall supply the readers
and Mr. Rau with even more references to prove my statements about
this issue, many more, and we will start with the Chieu Hoi program:

Note this issue is not about demeaning the debating skills or lack of
them of Tom Rau, (Dai Uy) he is, at least consistent with his
distortions and deceptions. It is about a failed policy of winning
the hearts and minds of our enemies. That policy failed in Vietnam,
and it failed in Iraq, and it is failing miserably again in
Afghanistan.

For some reason that I cannot figure out, Mr. Rau always supports the
Vietnamese regardless of the facts. I have no reason why he does what
he does in this regard? I suspect the man has been living with his
Vietnam experiences all of his adult life ever since he was forced to
retire early due to wounds. Perhaps those memories are all he has,
and perhaps those memories have defined his life, perhaps, but it
would be a sad case if that were true.

According to Lt. Col Ralph Peters, (re: Fox News comments) "not less
than 102 Americans have been murdered by Afghanistan trainees that our
Special Operations have trained."

I believe that 102 total certainly will rise by the time we pull our
troops out of that worthless pile of shit that nobody in their right
mind would want.

So why are we yet again repeating known failed polices in Afghanistan?
Ego's of high-ranking officers? Politics again? I say our troops
fighting this politically correct war created by our politicians are
NOT expendable. They did not go to war so some puke lawyer/politician
could get elected or reelected. They went to war to fight for our
country's interests and to win the war. If they were told beforehand
they would be used as political pawns to get some politicians'
elected, and they never would be allowed to win, and they had to
accept obvious enemy plants as "fellow soldiers" and allow those
plants to murder them at will, I somehow doubt if the men and women
fighting this war would have lined up so quickly at their debarkation
points.

Lies and fraud seem to have recently infiltrated our political system,
and unfortunately that dishonor and fraud have flittered down to our
military. The major difference if a Politician lies (and he has the
most money) he still wins the election - via "the best liar with the
most money wins" American political system. But if our troops are
lied to, regardless of their wealth, they end up dead. The price of
dishonor, fraud and lies to our military is far too high for our
troops to be sucked into Chicago style hype, bull and fraud politics.
I believe that is precisely what is going on in Afghanistan today -
and our young men and women are paying the ultimate price.

http://tinyurl.com/c5qdt4g

the Chieu Hoi Centre the re-edcuated fell into four categories;
1. Returned to their villages (some 5% estimated) Drafted into the
South Vietnamese Army (estimated some 20,000 a year enlisted through
the Chieu Hoi Program) Confirmed and Experienced ex-VC Combatants sent
to US and Australian Military groups as 'Kit Carson Scouts' (Guides -
Australians called them Bushman Scouts, every allied Tunnel Rat
specialist Unit had a Chieu Hoi defector attached.). Executed or sent
to POW Camps.
As a group, VC Defectors to the Allied Military were called 'Chieu Hoi
Rallier's'. They were seldom, if ever trusted and been seen as
traitors at least twice, from the democratic cause and to the
communist Cause. Many Allied forces felt they were, all, to a man,
still communists."

The Rand Corporation reported there were more than 25 thousand Chieu
Hoi's during 1968, and the allies considered the majority of them to
be still communists and still working for the communist cause.
However, according to the Rand Corporation, approximately 30% were
actually caught providing intelligence to the enemy. So if we do our
math, then we find approximately 7500 Chieu Hoi's turned coat and

helped the Communists kill Americans.

I stated at LEAST 1500 of CDIG, ARVN and Chieu Hoi's turned coat in
1968. I was counting only those times when we could directly
attribute the deaths of Americans to a Vietnamese that we trained
turning traitor. But if you count ALL the treachery, no one will ever
know exactly how many Americans and other allied soldiers the Chieu
Hoi program managed to kill our wound.

http://tinyurl.com/boryqgw

"But things did not always go so smooth with Chieu Hoi defectors. The
communists were shrewd and planted false returnees in the midst -
double agents. One such story is as follows. A re-educated returnee
with special skills and information was assigned to a reconnaissance
unit. The Chieu Hoi went out with a team and was the only one to
return alive, with a slight flesh wound to his upper arm. A second
team was sent out with this very lucky Hoi Chanh, but this time they
kept a careful watch on him. When the Chieu Hoi snuck off one night, a
team member was hot on his heels. The defector met up with a couple of
North Vietnamese soldiers, talked for a few minutes and headed back to
the team's location. The team member returned before the Chieu Hoi and
briefed the team on what he had seen. They immediately departed the
location and called for extraction a kilometer away. By the way... the
Chieu Hoi was mysteriously "killed in action."

With promises of economic aid, jobs, and relocation of family members
to safe areas, this program caused approximately 250,000 Viet Cong and
North Vietnamese Army defections from 1963-1975."
(About 21,000 defections per year - with 30% being or turning traitor
on the South Vietnamese Army and the Americans and their allies. That
figure alone means 6300 Chieu Hoi's turned against the Americans per
year. And Tom Rau wanted me to prove just a measly 1500 turned coat
in 1968? If this account alone does not more than prove my point,
that when we train obvious enemies after winning their "hearts and
minds" like we are doing in Afghanistan, we are simply adding more
American casualties, and suffering heartache after misery, and
repeating a known failed policy.)

Need I get into the figures for the CDIG, and ARVN traitors? No
wonder Tom Rau "omitted" that I had included not only CDIG forces, but
also ARVN and Chieu Hoi's in my 1500 traitors in 1968 alone statement.
. . no wonder he changes my posts around and then demands I reply to
his own distortions of them...he must know the truth...so why is he so
desperate to hide it? I am starting to feel sorry for the man...

As a result, some Chieu Hoi defectors became disillusioned anew,
returned to the VC fold, and warned their colleagues to not fall for
the promises of the government's Chieu Hoi program."


http://tinyurl.com/bskluk7

"Defector programs also provide CIA "talent scouts" with cover for
recruiting criminals into counter-terrorist and political action
programs. Burglars, arsonists, forgers and smugglers have unique
skills and no compunctions about conducting brutal interrogations. In
Vietnam, the entire 52nd Ranger Battalion of the South Vietnamese Army
was recruited from Saigon prisons."


http://tinyurl.com/9x74xab

(Above is from a CIA operative that helped to start the Chieu Hoi and
Phoenix programs in Vietnam)
"By 1969 more than a hundred thousand defectors had been processed
through 51 Chieu Hoi centers

But many Chieu Hoi defectors simply re-gurgitated the American line in
order to win amnesty, make a quick visit to their families, enjoy a
few home-cooked meals, and then return to the war for independence,
fat and rested.

Political and Psychological Warfare

The same lesson applies in Afghanistan. The U.S. has no legitimate
reason to be there, and thus it must rely on psychological ploys,
rather than any appeal to nationalism, to win the Afghanis over to the
American Way of doing things.

the U.S. is instituting a defector program, with a publicity campaign
managed in the field by psyops teams replete with radios, leaflets,
posters, banners, TV shows, movies, comic books falling from planes,
and loudspeakers mounted on trucks to spread the word.

This is how defectors will be created in Afghanistan as well. Psyops
leaflets aimed at creating defectors will portray the Taliban as a
socially disruptive force that can only be stopped by America.

And while the CIA relies on cartoons to sell itself, the Taliban go
from person to person, proving that technology was no substitute for
human contact. Ultimately the U.S. was defeated in Vietnam for just
this reason."

Doug Says: Winning the hearts and minds of a people you have attempted
to bomb back into the stone age, like we did in Vietnam, is not only
idiotic, it is preposterous. Now we are trying to win the "hearts and
minds" of a group of people that are taught in their Mosques every
Friday that we are (1) infidels, (2) Crusaders (3) are in Afghanistan
to destroy the Muslim religion. And our leaders' STILL want our
soldiers to kiss ass, kiss rings, bribe chiefs, and provide free rice,
beans and medical care, so as to "win the hearts and minds" of people
that are being told every Friday by their religious leaders to kill
us?

If this was not so tragic, and resulting in so many unnecessary deaths
of our troops, it would be hilarious.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:de8f63e1-a298-4967...@googlegroups.com...

On Wednesday, August 22, 2012 3:57:48 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:
> H&M KILLS AGAIN

> Here is what I did post about this issue and the 1500 events:
> "In 1968 alone, there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG
> forces and/or ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and
> killing
> or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!"
>
> Note that I included Chieu Hoi's, CDIG forces and/or ARVN'[s turning
> on American soldiers and killing them or helping the enemy to kill
> them! 1500 events!

All that I've ever asked is that you provide a citation that
supports your claim. That is neither insulting nor a personal attack.

Mr. Rau, in your last post you snipped out all of my references, then
you claimed I didn't post any, and then you said I was a serial liar.
When you hide the very references you ask for, then claim I never
posted any, and then falsely accuse me of lying, I can only surmise
that you have become delusional.

However, sigh, here is the proof again that you keep trying to hide.
Please do not snip it out and again claim I did not post it. You are
scaring the readers that don't know you.

FAILED VIETNAM/AFGHAN POLICY

this is not a copyrighted article. You may replay at alt.war.vietnam


The policy of training Afghans to become soldier allies is failing.

But that is no surprise, because that policy has failed in every war

or helping the enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!”

Yet here is what Tom Rau claimed I said:


“There were several incidents when CIDG surrendered -- few in which

they joined the communists. Why don't you post your references and

citations regarding 1500 cases of turncoats?”
Dai Uy

Obviously, I was NOT talking about just CIDG sic (CDIG) forces. I had
included in my 1500 events, Chieu Hoi’s, CDIG and /or ARVN’s.

Below you will find irrefutable proof that MORE THAN 1500 in the group
I mentioned did turn coat and helped the communists.

Note that I included Chieu Hoi’s, CDIG forces and/or ARVN’[s turning
on American soldiers and killing them or helping the enemy to kill
them! 1500 events!

However, regardless of Mr. Rau (Dai Uy) being caught yet again lying
about something I had previously posted, he still demanded even more
references to support my statement about Vietnamese traitors -
meanwhile he snipped out the ones I had already posted and then
outrageously claimed I had posted none! (Like I said, he was probably
shot in the head).

I am sure he will try to hide the references and absolute proof of my
1500 traitors in 1968 alone I will list below. Then he will again
claim I never posted any - which is SOP for Tom Rau if you have ever
encountered him previously on this forum.

I suspect, but I cannot prove, that sometime in the past he was shot
in the head - hard. But like I said before, that is just my opinion I
have been forced to conclude over the years due to the bizarre,
distorted, false and twisted responses I see this man post about my
articles and posts.

However, regardless of all the subterfuge, I shall supply the readers
and Mr. Rau with even more references to prove my statements about
this issue, many more, and we will start with the Chieu Hoi program:

(Note that is precisely what Tom Rau did. In response to my first
post that included all of the figures provided here with references,
Mr. Rau (Dai Uy) snipped out all of my references then claimed I did
not post any! - and then he tried to divert his obvious falsehoods by
claiming what I said about him distorting what I said and hiding my
references “adolescent.” If anyone is “adolescent” around here it is
Tom Rau who reverts to name calling, false accusations and obvious
subterfuge when he is proved wrong - as he has been in this post).

Note this issue is not about demeaning the debating skills or lack of
them of Tom Rau, (Dai Uy) he is, at least consistent with his
distortions and deceptions. It is about a failed policy of winning
the hearts and minds of our enemies. That policy failed in Vietnam,
and it failed in Iraq, and it is failing miserably again in
Afghanistan.

For some reason that I cannot figure out, Mr. Rau always supports the
Vietnamese regardless of the facts. I have no reason why he does what
he does in this regard? I suspect the man has been living with his
Vietnam experiences all of his adult life ever since he was forced to
retire early due to wounds. Perhaps those memories are all he has,
and perhaps those memories have defined his life, perhaps, but it
would be a sad case if that were true.

Perhaps Mr. Rau is ashamed that he told all of his Vietnamese friends
that we would support them against the communists forever? Someone
should tell Mr. Rau that lying to these people was not his fault - he
was lied to by the politicians in power at the time. The politicians
lied to the Generals, and the Generals passed on that lie to people
like Tom Rau and me, and hundreds of thousands of other men that
fought in Vietnam. It was not the US Army’s fault the Yards, and ARVN’s
and CDIG forces, and the Chieu Hoi’s were lied to - it was the
lawyer/politicians back in Washington that was doing all of the lying.

You may note that every single Special Forces camp, and every CDIG or
ARVN camp that was trained by the Green Beret types, was overrun by
the enemy. So even if we did manage to convince these people we would
support them, and they did fight the communists, they STILL failed to
win the battles and the war! So why do we waste our time training
indigenous personnel to fight with us when we occupy a foreign
country? It looks good for the politicians is the only reason I can
fathom as all of the other reasons are idiotic.


AFGHANISTAN FOLLOWING THE FAILURES OF VIETNAM

[DGVREIMAN]

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:f69725ef-1a96-48a2...@googlegroups.com...

On Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:05:04 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:
> "Dai Uy" wrote in message

I wrote, and you deleted the following after accusing me of
deleting your references:

To briefly summarize:

Here are all the references that you've provided.

http://tinyurl.com/8fulkml
http://tinyurl.com/9xbss3q
http://tinyurl.com/9melvnh
http://tinyurl.com/9fze476
http://tinyurl.com/7gcbku
http://tinyurl.com/c5qdt4g
http://tinyurl.com/boryqgw
http://tinyurl.com/bskluk7
http://tinyurl.com/9x74xab

You will notice, as did I, that none of them support your
assertions. Why is that?

You missed a few Mr. Rau, and they ALL support my statements. Did you
even read them?

No mention anywhere to support your assertion "In 1968 alone,

there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG forces and/or
ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing or helping the
enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!"

You apparently cannot read. Of course my posts provide irrefutable
proof that MORE THAN 1500 cases turned coat in 1968. Also, here is
some more proof that CIDG forces turned coat:


There's a logical explanation for all that. The reason there is
no mention is because it is untrue and you made the whole thing up.
Just like you made up the Rand Corporation figure that approximately
30% of the Chieu Hois were later caught providing intelligence to the
enemy. That's untrue. Just like the made up statement of 102 green
on blue killings by Afghans trained by Special Operations personnel.
That is untrue also.

Mr. Rau, where did I say that 102 Afgans "THAT WERE TRAINED BY
SPECIAL OPERATIONS PERSONNEL" turned on their trainers? I said that
Lt. Col Ralph Peters stated on Fox News that there were 102 dead GI's
due to murder by Afghans that had been trained by Americans. Now you
have changed the general term Americans to "special operations
personnel."

When you change, alter, distort what I say, then claim your own
distortion is a lie, then are you not calling yourself a liar? I
suspect you are.

Further, if you bother to read my references, which you did not, then
you would have included the word "approximately" 30% - not the set in
stone 30% you stated. . . .must I repeat the exact words again just to
keep you honest?

Mr. Rau, when you lose a debate or a point, simply admit it. Instead
of distorting what I said, then lying about what I said, and claiming
your own distortion is a lie, and thereby making yourself look like a
drooling idiot, child like drooling idiot, try to be a man for once
and simply admit you were wrong. Of course thousands of combined
Chieu Hoi's, ARVN's and CIDG forces turned on and revolted against the
South Vietnamese/American forces. . . . any fool can find evidence of
that fact in a heartbeat. Here is some more for you to distort:

CIDG TRAITORS

This is not a copyrighted article - you may reply at alt.war.vietnam.


(Also see my previous posts ("Vietnamese Traitors") and ("Failed
Vietamese/Afghan Policy) for more references and support of the vast
amount of Vietnamese that turned coat on the South Vietnamese/American
effort in Vietnam, and thereby helped the communists during the
Vietnam war).

See below for absolute proof a large number of CIDG forces revolted
against the South Vietnam/American forces.

http://tinyurl.com/d7xab8p

Doug Says: I said the Montagnards were stone age people. Some said
that comment was "racist" - but since when is properly describing a
group of people we attempted to con to fight and die for us Americans
"racist?" Here is some background information about one of the main
tribes:

"The Rhade have lived on the high plateau for centuries, and their way
of life has changed little in that time; whatever changes came were
mainly the result of their contact with the "civilized" world through
the French. They settle in places where their livelihood can be easily
secured, locating their houses and rice fields near rivers and
springs. Because they have no written history, not much was known
about them until their contact with the French in the early nineteenth
century. It is generally agreed that most of their ancestors migrated
from greater China, while the remainder came from Tibet and Mongolia.

(Doug Says: "No written history." That is one of the classic
anthropological requirements to describe a tribal people as "stone
age.")

"In order of descending importance, the social units of the Rhade are
the family, the household, the kinsmen, and the village. The Rhade
have a matrilineal system; the man is the breadwinner, but all
property is owned by the wife. The oldest female owns the house and
animals. The married man lives with his wife's family and is required
to show great respect for his mother-in-law. If a man is rich enough
he may have more than one wife, but women may have only one husband.
Marriage is proposed by the woman, and the eldest daughter inherits
her parents' property.
Building a house is a family enterprise. All members of families who
wish to live together pitch in and build a longhouse in accordance
with the size of the families. The house is made largely of woven
bamboo and is long and narrow, sometimes 400 feet long, with entrances
at each end. Both family and guests may use the front entrance, but
only the resident families may use the rear. The house is built on
posts with the main floor usually about four feet above the ground and
is almost always constructed with a north-south orientation, following
the axis of the valleys.
The tasks of the man and woman of the family are the traditional ones.
The man cuts trees, clears land, weaves bamboo, fishes, hunts, builds
houses, carries heavy objects, conducts business, makes coffins,
buries the dead, stores rice, makes hand tools and weapons, strikes
the ceremonial gongs (an important duty) and is responsible for
preparing the rice wine. Authority in the Rhade
Page 23
family is maintained by the man (the father or the grandfather.) It
is he who makes the decisions, consulting with his wife in most cases,
and he who is responsible for seeing that his decisions are carried
out. The average Rhade man is between sixty-four and sixty-six inches
tall, brown in complexion, and usually broad shouldered and very
sturdy. The men have a great deal of endurance and manual dexterity
and have the reputation of being excellent runners.
The woman draws water, collects firewood, cooks the food, cleans the
house, mends and washes the clothes, weaves, makes the traditional
red, black, yellow, and blue cotton cloth of the Rhade, and cares for
the children. The women sit on the porch (the bhok-gah) of the
longhouse to pound the rice with a long pole and a wooden mortar.
The life of the Rhade is governed by many taboos and customs.
Outsiders are expected to honor these, and therefore delicacy was
required of Special Forces troops who dealt with the Rhade and other
tribes. Healing is the responsibility of the village shaman, or witch
doctor, and the general state of health among the Rhade is
Page 24
poor. Religion is animistic (natural objects are thought to be
inhabited by spirits)but the tribe also has a god (Ae Die) and a devil
(Tang Lie).

Doug Says: Not only does these tribal people not have any written
history, they also rely on Witch Doctors for medical treatment, and
worship trees and stones. Their weapons were also made of sticks,
bows, spears and throwing slings. They certainly sound "stone age" to
me.
"The Rhade tend toward a migratory existence. Once they have used up
the soil's vitality in one area, they move their village to a new
place, seeking virgin soil or land that has not been used for half a
century. At the beginning of the rainy season the people plant corn,
squash, potatoes, cucumbers, eggplant, and bananas. Once these crops
are in the ground, the rice is planted.

The Rhade and the US Army's CIDG program - and their revolt:

The Rhade proved to be enthusiastic participants in the CIDG program
in the beginning because the early projects were, they felt, pleasing
to the spirits and helpful to their villages. If these two
requirements were satisfied (and in many instances they were not later
on), the Rhade, and the Montagnards in general, were quite willing to
work hard in the CIDG program.
The Montagnards were not, of course, the only minority group involved
in the CIDC, program; other groups were Cambodians, Nung tribesmen
from the highlands of North Vietnam, and ethnic Vietnamese from the
Cao Dai and Hoa Hao religious sects.


Montagnard CIDG turn on the South Vietnamese Government en mass:

"Montagnards have in common an ingrained hostility toward the
Vietnamese and a desire to be independent." The Vietnamese had
traditionally regarded as an inferior people, calling them "moi," or
savages, and begrudging them their tribal lands.

"Concern in Saigon about the large number of weapons distributed to
the Rhade resulted in a government order to reduce the number of
weapons by 4,000. Difficulty was encountered in collecting the weapons
because the tribesmen had received no instructions to turn them in.
The order to do so appeared to them to be inconsistent with what they
had been told, namely, that the weapons given them were for the
defense of their villages and families. At the time of the turnover,
there were still 2,000 more weapons in the province than Saigon
regulations permitted, and there were further collections. The Special
Forces did not participate in the collection of weapons.
Disillusionment following the turnover of Buon Enao may have
contributed to the Montagnard uprising which took place in late
September 1964.

The reasons for the failure of the Buon Enao turnover can be
summarized as follows: mutual suspicion and hostility between the
Rhade and Vietnamese province and district officials; overly generous
distribution by U.S. agencies of weapons and ammunition to tribesmen
whose reaction to government enforced repossession of
Page 44
some of the weapons was understandably hostile;.apparent disregard on
the part of the Vietnam government for the interests, desires, and
sensitivities of the Montagnards; inadequate Vietnamese government
administrative and logistical support; and, finally, failure of U.S.
authorities to anticipate these difficulties and avoid them."

(Doug Says: No wonder the Yards turned on the South Vietnamese
Government - no wonder many of them accepted Communist ideals and
rule).

"Inadequate initial area assessment led in some cases to the selection
of unproductive sites that later had to be relocated. Some camps were
situated on indefensible terrain or had limited CIDG potential. Other
camps were moved or closed out altogether because of the discontent of
the strike force, which had been recruited from a distant area because
of the lack of local resources."

" Doug Says: Discontent of the Strike Force" sounds very familiar
when you consider how our Afghan "Strike Force" CIDG forces are
operating, not counting the more than one hundred times they have
turned their weapons on our troops that trained them of course - they
seem to be experts at doing that - as were the Sedang, Nongao and
Bahwar tribes in Vietnam. This bullshit, (trying to win the hearts
and minds of a stone age people, or people that are told we are
Infidels, and get them to die for our cause, is beyond the "big con"
the American politicians try to sell to the American people about the
"withdraw with honor" hype and bull we try to sell when we run and
hide from a war we started.")


Of course ALL CIDG camps were overrun by the communist enemy, and of
course the entire program failed miserably - as it is doing in
Afghanistan. So why are we repeating a known failed policy in
Afghanistan? To get more of our troops killed? To hide the fact we
are losing the war? So American politicians can get elected or
reelected? Pick one.



These operational changes and the resumption of
minority mistreatment by Vietnamese authorities almost
killed the CIDG program. On 19 September 1964, five
Montagnard CIDG camps near Ban Me Thout revolted
against the Vietnamese government. 23

Definition of "Revolt" - "to rebel against existing authority - to
change sides in a war."



Doug Grant (Tm)



***

[DGVREIMAN]

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:f5b0d206-68f1-4056...@googlegroups.com...

This has reached the point of being silly.

I've merely asked you to provide citations or references to
support your claims. I've not resorted to insults nor ad hominem
attacks. Either produce something to support your claims or admit you
were mistakes, or misspoke. Be a man. If you are unable to, you can
take your bogus assertions and ram them back up the place that you
pulled them out of.

Mr. Rau, you keep snipping out my excerpts and references that prove
my statements then you claim I never posted them. Silly? You bet!
Also, you were the one that used the ad hominem attacks -
"chickenhawk" "serial liar" were your terms, not mine.

So yes, you do appear silly. Here is absolute proof of my statements
about 1500 Chieu Hois, ARVN's and CIDG forces turning traitor in 1968
alone:

If you snip them out again you will of course continue to look
"silly."


LIES ABOUT VIETNAMESE/AFGHAN DEFECTORS

This is not a copyrighted article. You may reply at alt.war.vietnam.

Note a poster on this NG (Tom Rau -Dai Uy) keeps snipping out my
references and excerpts and then he claims I never posted any. He
had done this several times before on other issues. It seems to be
his debating mantra, snip out the evidence he is wrong and call the
person that proved him wrong a liar. I know that is child like
tactics, but perhaps he is still a child in his mind?

If he snips out the excerpts again from this post and makes the same
deceptive claim, I will simply re-post what he is clearly so desperate
to hide.

So far, I have posted three posts that questions the policy of
training Afghans the same way we trained Vietnamese Tribes to fight
for our cause. I seriously question this policy because when you
consider the combination of Chieu Hoi's, CIDG forces including
Montaguards, and of course ARVN's that turned traitor after we trained
them during the Vietnam war (AT LEAST 1500 Vietnamese turn coats in
the year of 1968 alone) our policy of training indigenous personnel to
fight for our cause was a dismal failure.

When I say they turned traitor that means they either revolted against
the South Vietnamese government (which of course helped the communist
cause) or they were double agents, or they simply Chieu Hoi and then
returned to the communist Viet Cong with as much intelligence as they
could gather about South Vietnamese/American and allied forces. There
was also much fan fare about ARVN's deserting and joining the
communists toward the end of the war, apparently by the thousands.

A poster on this NG, Tom Rau (who calls himself Dai Uy) actually did
at one time, long long ago, help to train CIDG and Montaguard forces -
which is what many Green Beret type Special Forces did in Vietnam.
He keeps snipping out the evidence those politics in Vietnam failed -
I don't know why. You be the judge why he keeps trying to hide
evidence of those failed policies?

As someone who spent about twice as much time in Vietnam as Tom Rau
did, and probably experienced about ten times more combat than he did,
I believe we wasted our Green Beret force on this nonsense, and
instead of baby sitting stone age people, and beguiling them to fight
and die for us, based upon the false promises that we would always pay
them (we didn't) arm them (we took their guns away) and support them
(we bugged out and left them to fend for themselves) that force would
have been much better served killing the enemy.

That same opinion holds sway in Afghanistan today. Lt. Col Ralph
Peters said on Fox news this week (I believe on Tuesday) that not less
than 102 Americans have been murdered by Afghans that we have trained.
(Note that our Special Operations trained most of these Afghans, but
some could have been trained by other allies or other Americans).

Yet incredibly Tom Rau (Dai Uy) said what Lt. Col Peters said was a
lie.

Why would Tom Rau claim Lt. Col Peters is lying? How would Tom Rau
know one way or another? Why would Lt. Col Peters lie on national
television? Has Tom Rau provided any evidence Lt. Col Peters was
lying? Naw, Tom Rau has none, as usual, to back up his outrageous
false accusations directed against people that disagree with him.

http://tinyurl.com/93njanz

I guess the number has risen to 105 as three Marines were recently
murdered by an Afghan Police Chief. I don't know who specifically
trained that murdering Police Chief, but I am sure it was Americans. .
.

"Three members of America's special operation forces killed by Afghan
solider after he invited them to security meeting"

"U.S. soldier killed and two others injured on attack by Afghan
soldier on Tuesday."

"On Wednesday suicide bombers in Kunar province killed three NATO
members and one Afghan civilian."

"Thursday Afghan soldiers tried to gun down NATO troops;

an Afghan soldier was killed 31 coalition service members killed by
Afghan forces or insurgents this year."

But Tom Rau says Lt. Col Peters was lying. So does Tom Rau provide
any evidence, references, cites that Lt. Col Peters lied? Naw, Tom
Rau never provides any proof in respect to any one he says is lying.
We are just supposed to take Tom Rau's word for it. Lt. Col Peters
has no reason to lie about this issue, and he certainly is privy to
more information about this issue than I am and certainly more than
Tom Rau. Note the above URL's certainly support Lt. Col Peter's
statements in this regard.

Here is another account of Afghan counterparts killing Special
Operations personnel in just the last two weeks alone:

http://tinyurl.com/8swpw84 August 20, 2012

"Their deaths bring the toll of American soldiers killed by their
local counterparts to 11 in the past two weeks."
(Doug Says: Now add the numbers from above, and if you cannot see a
pattern of double agents, turn coats, and traitors helping our enemy
just like they did in Vietnam, then you are either (1) blind, (2)
stupid (3) in denial (4) all three.

http://tinyurl.com/9te2dhl
"Many of our Afghan comrades wander around here completely stoned,"
said one soldier in Mazar-e-Sharif. "It is impossible to tell if they
are fit for duty or not." Other soldiers confirm the report, saying
that many from Afzal's unit made it a habit to smoke hashish outside
the camp perimeter in the evenings."

http://tinyurl.com/8bjavyp

"Afghan Police trained by US Firm -
The audit focused on the transfer of the Afghan police training
programme from the US State Department to the US Defense department.
The investigation, carried out jointly by both departments, criticized
both institutions for a lack of co-ordination in regards to police
training in Afghanistan, which is a priority for the US-led NATO
coalition as it prepares to transfer security to Afghan forces."

VIETNAM SIMILARITIES

The following URL and excerpts prove the amount of Chieu Hoi's that
turned coat and helped the Communists AFTER they Chieu Hoi'ed. Note
that I said a combination of CIDG, Chieu Hoi's and ARVN's that turned
coat and helped the Communists in 1968 was not less than 1500! Tom
Rau says that is a lie, and I cannot prove that number. But if you
read below, the 1500 number is actually LIGHT - and the Chieu Hoi's
alone made up that 1500 amount of traitors alone and then some!

http://tinyurl.com/c5qdt4g
the Chieu Hoi Centre the re-edcuated fell into four categories;
1. Returned to their villages (some 5% estimated) Drafted into the
South Vietnamese Army (estimated some 20,000 a year enlisted through
the Chieu Hoi Program) Confirmed and Experienced ex-VC Combatants sent
to US and Australian Military groups as 'Kit Carson Scouts' (Guides -
Australians called them Bushman Scouts, every allied Tunnel Rat
specialist Unit had a Chieu Hoi defector attached.). Executed or sent
to POW Camps.
As a group, VC Defectors to the Allied Military were called 'Chieu Hoi
Rallier's'. They were seldom, if ever trusted and been seen as
traitors at least twice, from the democratic cause and to the
communist Cause. Many Allied forces felt they were, all, to a man,
still communists."

(Doug's Note: "The allied forces they were, all, to a man, still
communists!" The URL above, if correct, indicates that 20,000 Chieu
Hoi's per year were STILL working for the communists! Let me see, is
20,000 more than 1500? DUH, Yes. So can Tom Rau add? Duh, No.) But
there is even more proof, much more):

The Rand Corporation reported there were more than 25 thousand Chieu
Hoi's during 1968, and the allies considered the majority of them to
be still communists and still working for the communist cause.
However, according to the Rand Corporation, approximately 30% were
actually caught providing intelligence to the enemy. So if we do our
math, then we find approximately 7500 Chieu Hoi's turned coat and
helped the Communists kill Americans.

(Tom Rau said the Rand Corporation never said 30% were actually caught
providing intelligence to the enemy." Of course he left out the word
"approximately" but we know that the URL below states in agreement
with the Rand Corporation's estimate the following:

"As a result, some Chieu Hoi defectors became disillusioned anew,
returned to the VC fold, and warned their colleagues to not fall for
the promises of the government's Chieu Hoi program."

So is Mr. Rau arguing about the 1500 number? Considering 21,000 Chieu
Hoi's per year, and the allied forces considered ALL OF THEM to be
still Communists, as the URL clearly states above, is a measly 1500 in
one year to be considered too many? Naw, it is clear the 1500 number
is a drop in the bucket, especially if we include the revolt against
the Saigon government of an entire people that made up the CIDG
forces! Gosh, is Mr. Rau claiming that revolting against the Saigon
Government and the ARVN did not help the communist cause? Naw, even
he would not expect the readers to be that stupid!

Note that if 25000 Chieu Hoi's were processed, and 20,000 were
conscripted into the ARVN Army, and 5% were returned to their
villages, even if we do not consider any of the ARVN Chieu Hoi's
conscripts deserting (which many did) that still leaves 25000 - 5%
(-1250) -20,000)
=3750 that returned to the Viet Cong or NVA! So, is 3750 more than
1500? Of course. So again we see hard evidence of more than 1500
Vietnamese traitors in 1968 alone!

Once again, I stated at LEAST 1500 of combined CDIG, ARVN and Chieu
Hoi's turned coat in 1968. But if you count ALL the treachery, no one

will ever know exactly how many Americans and other allied soldiers

the Chieu Hoi program alone managed to kill our wound.

In 1968 it was reported that it was costing the American taxpayer
$400,000 for each enemy soldier killed. So the Chieu Hoi program was
much less expensive, but we paid for that less expense in the extra
lives of our your men and our allies these traitors caused

Now we are doing the same exact thing in Afghanistan. The life of a
GI seems to have less of a value than the life of an Afghan - strange
war we are fighting.

Below is more evidence of the treachery of those we trained in Vietnam
to take our place when we bugged out, er "withdrew with honor."

http://tinyurl.com/boryqgw

"But things did not always go so smooth with Chieu Hoi defectors. The
communists were shrewd and planted false returnees in the midst -
double agents."

Doug Says: So if the Communists were able to plant only ten percent
(one in ten) of the Chieu Hoi defectors as double agents as the above
URL expert reference states, and there were 25,000 Chieu Hoi's in 1968
as is also stated, then that means there were at LEAST 2500 TRAITORS!
I said there were not less than 1500 traitors - Tom Rau must have
problems understanding basic math for him to challenge that number.

Moreover, do I need to get into the traitor figures for the CDIG, and

Doug Says: So how many is "many?" Certainly more than 10%, and that
means again, there were many turn coats that number more than 1500 in
the year of 1968 - not unless Tom Rau wants us to believe the MANY
Chieu Hoi's that returned to the ranks of the Viet Cong did not bring
with them everything they found out about the Americans and about the
ARVN and about those men that actually stayed with the Chieu Hoi
program - and you can bet their families disappeared one night - and
that was the way of the Viet Cong.

I should also mention an entire CIDG force revolted against the Saigon
Government and its forces when the Saigon Government tried to disarm
them after the Americans had armed them. Gosh, does revolting against
the Saigon Government help the communists? Of course it does.
Is Tom Rau trying to claim that his beloved Sedang, Nongao and Bahwar
never turned coat and that entire revolt never helped the communist
cause in Vietnam? Naw, even the communists hailed that revolt as a
victory.

CDIG REVOLT

"Concern in Saigon about the large number of weapons distributed to
the Rhade resulted in a government order to reduce the number of
weapons by 4,000. Difficulty was encountered in collecting the weapons
because the tribesmen had received no instructions to turn them in.
The order to do so appeared to them to be inconsistent with what they
had been told, namely, that the weapons given them were for the
defense of their villages and families. At the time of the turnover,
there were still 2,000 more weapons in the province than Saigon
regulations permitted, and there were further collections. The Special
Forces did not participate in the collection of weapons.
Disillusionment following the turnover of Buon Enao may have
contributed to the Montagnard uprising which took place in late
September 1964.

The reasons for the failure of the Buon Enao turnover can be
summarized as follows: mutual suspicion and hostility between the
Rhade and Vietnamese province and district officials; overly generous
distribution by U.S. agencies of weapons and ammunition to tribesmen
whose reaction to government enforced repossession of
Page 44
some of the weapons was understandably hostile;.apparent disregard on
the part of the Vietnam government for the interests, desires, and
sensitivities of the Montagnards; inadequate Vietnamese government
administrative and logistical support; and, finally, failure of U.S.
authorities to anticipate these difficulties and avoid them."

Does Tom Rau want us to believe that a entire revolt of the CIDG
forces did not help the communist cause? Of course it did. And there
were many CIDG "conscripts" (they were volunteered by their Chiefs and
they had no personal choice to join or not join) that revolted against
the Allied forces fighting the communists. . . as the above account
clearly states.





Bottom Line: As we see from the Chieu Hoi, CIDG, and ARVN accounts, my
statement there not less than 1500 traitors to the American cause in
Vietnam in 1968 alone appears to be very light considering the figures
provided by independent experts above. It appears my number of 1500
is clearly an underestimate of the total amount of Vietnamese traitors
that turned their coats that year.

Political and Psychological Warfare

Our CIDG and Chieu Hoi programs in Vietnam failed miserably, and God
only knows how many Americans and their allies those idiotic programs
managed to get killed or wounded. War is not political, it is not
meant to be political, it cannot be political, and it must be basic,
it must be kill the enemy as quickly and as efficiently as you can. .
. and if that is not your objective then don't go to war.

"The same lesson applies in Afghanistan. The U.S. has no legitimate
reason to be there, and thus it must rely on psychological ploys,

rather than any appeal to nationalism, to win the Afghans over to the
American Way of doing things. The U.S. is instituting a defector

program, with a publicity campaign managed in the field by psyops
teams replete with radios, leaflets, posters, banners, TV shows,
movies, comic books falling from planes, and loudspeakers mounted on
trucks to spread the word.

This is how defectors will be created in Afghanistan as well. Psyops
leaflets aimed at creating defectors will portray the Taliban as a
socially disruptive force that can only be stopped by America.

And while the CIA relies on cartoons to sell itself, the Taliban go
from person to person, proving that technology was no substitute for
human contact. Ultimately the U.S. was defeated in Vietnam for just
this reason."

End excerpt:

Doug Says: Winning the hearts and minds of a people you have attempted
to bomb back into the stone age, like we did in Vietnam, is not only

idiotic, it is preposterous. Now we are trying to win the "hearts and
minds" of a group of people that are taught in their Mosques every

Friday that we are (1) infidels, (2) Crusaders (3) are in Afghanistan

to destroy the Muslim religion. Nevertheless our political leaders'

STILL want our soldiers to kiss ass, kiss rings, bribe chiefs, and

provide free rice, beans and medical care, so as to "win the hearts
and minds" of people that are being told every Friday by their

religious leaders to kill us?





If this was not so tragic, and resulting in so many unnecessary deaths
of our troops, it would be hilarious.

The failures of our CIDG and Chieu Hoi programs in Vietnam, and the
failures of our Vietnamization program, should not be repeated in ANY
future war - but that is exactly what the politicians are forcing our
Generals to do - repeat idiotic programs and tactics they know (1)
will fail and (2) will get more of our troops killed or wounded than
would be necessary if we simply waged a total war, and ended that war
in the six or so weeks it would take to do so.

When we go to war with Iran are we going to do the same idiotic stupid
things we did in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan? The Iranians will
suck us in, and then turn on us the same as other radical Muslims are
doing - and if you think we have been up against radical Muslims so
far, wait until we invade Iran.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[DGVREIMAN]

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:5f95d887-1684-43a4...@googlegroups.com...
On Sunday, August 26, 2012 11:42:11 AM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:
> LIES ABOUT VIETNAMESE/AFGHAN DEFECTORS

You've slipped up and titled a thread correctly.

You've been attempting to compare Vietnamese and Afghan troops,
attempting to claim that the Vietnamese troops turned and killed
Americans 1500 times in a single year. Instead of just telling you
that you were a bald-faced liar, I politely suggested that you should
provide a reference for such an assertion.

I'll tell you why you can't. Because it never happened as even
you must know after all the effort you've gone through to pull up
irrelevant citations. None, not a one, of them support your
assertion. Do you really think that any of them do?

Mr. Rau, can you read? Your statement above that I said "1500 turned
and killed American troops in a single year" contradicts even what you
said I said about this issue in your own last post! Do you make this
shit up as you go along? Do you have some kind of reading
comprehension problem? You have been lying about my references, lying
about the obvious THOUSANDS of Vietnamese traitors that turned coat
during the Vietnam war, and I for one cannot imagine why? Not unless
you actually want to look like a dogmatic idiot?

Here is what Mr. Rau said I said in his last post on this issue:

" No mention anywhere to support your assertion "In 1968 alone,
there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG forces and/or
ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing or helping the

enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!""

Note that Mr. Rau, in his usual deceptive style, in this post has now
removed some key words from what I really said: Rau now claims I said
above that:

"you claim that the Vietnamese troops turned and killed Americans 1500
times in a single year."

(1) Mr. Rau now claims I was exclusively talking about Vietnamese
troops - obviously I included the Chieu Hoi's - Tom Rau hid that part.
(2) Mr. Rau now also claims I said Vietnamese troops turned on their
Americans and killed them -1500 in a single year. Tom Rau hid the key
word "helped" and he hid the inclusion Chieu Hoi and CIDG forces.

I sometimes wonder if Mr. Rau makes up this fraud as he goes along, or
he is doing it on purpose so as to appear to be a serial-liar? His
lying is so weird, obvious and constant I am beginning to think it is
pathological. What did he call me again "bald face liar?" Pot
kettle Black Mr. Rau.

Once again I cannot respond to Tom Rau's fraudulent versions of what I
said. Since he made up the lie perhaps he should be the one to
address it?

However, I can and DID prove what I did say irrefutably, as the
following post clearly substantiates:

Mr. Rau, if my references and excerpts did not prove my statements you
would not keep trying to hide them by snipping them out and then lying
and distorting what I did say about this issue.

It is clear to all rational people that have read my references that
THOUSANDS of Chieu Hoi's-ARVN and CIDG combined turned coat during the
Vietnam war.

The DOZENS of references, cites from experts I have provided in my
last four posts about this issue clearly, irrefutably and without
question prove that fact.

You seem to be in some kind of denial about your beloved Vietnamese -
I suggest you take your obviously prejudicial blind folds off. I know
you helped train the CIDG, and perhaps that is why you are in denial
of the obvious - you do know that in 1970, due to the failure of all
the CIDG forces and camps, they were all disbanded and the ARVN took
over their camps? That fact should at least give you a hint.

Below is what you keep hiding. If you wish to argue any of the
excerpts and points I list below, then do so without trying to hide
them and then ridiculously claiming I never posted them in the first
place! You cannot win a debate by hiding what the opposition is
saying, then fraudulently claiming the opposition never said what you
are so desperate to hide! Of course my references prove my
statements, read the references and tell me why they do not if you
really wish to debate this issue. But to snip out my references, then
claim I am lying, and that Lt. Col Peters is lying, and everybody is
lying that disagrees with you, is not a debating tactic that I believe
rational people will accept as a sound argument.

If you wish to keep believing in fairy tales about the Vietnamese that
is up to you. But the facts clearly show that thousands turned coat
and many others were secretly working for the communists all along -
and God knows how many Americans and our allies that were killed or
wounded due to these traitors -much like we are witnessing in
Afghanistan today.

Doug Grant (Tm)

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:5aa16070-3cc0-4ff6...@googlegroups.com...
On Monday, August 27, 2012 1:38:42 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:

> > LIES ABOUT VIETNAMESE/AFGHAN DEFECTORS

Okay, one more time. I pointed out the undeniable fact that your
"references" do not support your statement.

Mr. Rau, you keep adding or taking away key words from my statement,
then you claim my references do not support my statement - which you
distorted and changed! I included Chieu Hoi's, AND CIDG, AND ARVN'
turn coats in my 1500 traitors in 1968 alone. You changed my stated
to EXCLUDE Chieu Hoi's and ARVN's then you fraudulently claim I did
not post references to support my statement!

If you would stop altering, forging, changing, distorting what I said,
and read my references you will see, irrefutably, that of course my
references and figures more than support my statment, and in fact the
Chieu Hoi's alone would represent more than 1500 traitors per year!

> " No mention anywhere to support your assertion "In 1968 alone,

Mr. Rau, the references and figures I provided break down the amounts
per year, and overall. Certainly you do understand averages?

> there were more than 1500 cases of Chieu Hoi's, CDIG forces and/or
> ARVN soldiers turning on American soldiers and killing or helping
> the
> enemy to kill them! 1500 cases!""

Of course my references above (which you keep snipping out and trying
to hide) confirm, support, prove, and substantiate my statement that
you have FINALLY stated correctly. If they did not you would not keep
hiding them by snipping them out.

If you wish to address the specifics of what I posted above, such as
the average amount of Chieu Hoi's etc. . and the fact that many of
them return to the Communists, then (1) leave my references intact,
(2) state your evidence why you dispute those figures. Also, you said
Lt. Col Peters lied when he said 102 Americans had been killed by
Afghans we had trained that turned on us in the past few years.
Please also provide your evidence that he lied.

Doug Grant (Tm)
>
> Note that Mr. Rau, in his usual deceptive style, in this post has
> now
> removed some key words from what I really said: Rau now claims I
> said
> above that:
>
> "you claim that the Vietnamese troops turned and killed Americans
> 1500
> times in a single year."

That is simply a synopsis of your statement that I posted in it's
entirety above. Did you miss it?

>
> (1) Mr. Rau now claims I was exclusively talking about Vietnamese
> troops - obviously I included the Chieu Hoi's - Tom Rau hid that
> part.
> (2) Mr. Rau now also claims I said Vietnamese troops turned on their
> Americans and killed them -1500 in a single year. Tom Rau hid the
> key
> word "helped" and he hid the inclusion Chieu Hoi and CIDG forces.
>

Adding in Chieu Hois, CIDG, and for good measure, the white mice,
school teachers, medical workers, and other RVN officials, you have
not produced a single reference suggesting that, in 1968 alone, there
were 1500 cases of their turning coat and killing, or HELPING to kill,
Americans.

While searching for that elusive reference, try to find one where
I said LTC Peters lied, or that the Rand Corporation concluded that
30% of the Chieu Hois turned coat again, or that the green on blue
attackers in Afghanistan were trained by Special Operations personnel.

Fetch…

***
Learn to read, stop hiding proof and claiming none was posted, and
stop altering my statements.

Senility.

Doug Grant (Tm)

"Dai Uy" <Dai...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message

news:ea6cb8d5-38ea-4d09...@googlegroups.com...
On Monday, August 27, 2012 1:12:59 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:

On Monday, August 27, 2012 1:12:59 PM UTC-10, Dietz wrote:

- - - - - [nothing of consequence deleted] - - - - -

Your entire post is right above mine... I can't hide it. Only
you can, and have, hiden your postings.

Mr. Rau, when you snip out my references and the excerpts I extracted
from them to prove my statements, you are obviously attempting to hide
evidence from the readers. You have been doing this for years. What
smidgen of credibility you might have been able to retain with the
readers will be lost completely if you continue to be so obtuse and
dishonest.

Leave the references in. If you do not understand averaging, and how
statistics are applied to averages, then I suggest you not enter into
debates with someone that does.

Of course my 1500 combination Chieu Hoi's, CIDG and ARVN traitors in
1968 is completely, irrefutably, and without question proved by my
above post, which once again, you snipped out and tried to hide.

Stop hiding my proof then claiming I did not post any. You have been
doing this for years. You should have learned by now your deceptive
tactics do not work. Also, stop extracting key words from my
statements and then howl and whine that I did not prove your own
distortion.

Thousands of Vietnamese were traitors. Moreover your beloved CIDG
camps were disbanded in 1970 and taken over by the ARVN because they
were (1) ineffective, (2) dangerous to the Saigon Government. So my
key point that our "win hearts and minds" and "train indigenous
personnel to fight for us" failed in Vietnam is clearly proved by the
historical fact the ARVN had to take over the CIDG camps, and many
Chieu HOi's returned to the Communist cause. We are seeing the same
failures in Afghanistan. We need to stop doing this - it is getting
our men killed.

Moreover, you leave in my URL references but you cut out the key proof
I have extracted from them, and then you call those extracts that
completely prove my statements "long winded." Cute, but stupid.

Rational people can instantly see you are being dishonest when you
snip out extracts from references and then claim you are leaving them
in.

The idea is to extract elements from each reference so the readers are
not required to read entire books to find the proof I am providing.
You snip out the extracts, forcing them to read the book or entire
article, which you know they will not.

Deceptive? Of course. But that seems to be your one and only
debating style.

Doug Grant (Tm)