well i voted as great leader, he didnt do any terrible things like stalin or mao, and he really seemed to care for his people, what u think?

Well he was a dictator (read non-elected chief of state) but he did well. I visited Vietnam 2 years ago and go to his mausoleum. He has not be very criticize in his country comparing to Mao and Stalin.

He was a real red SOB. And what do you expect of those people? :rolleyes:

can u back that up? Mr nixon?

A wicked communist dictator, whose cursed remains should get the treatment that Cromwell's did. Why? Being responsible for the invasion and conquest of the South by evil communist forces comes to mind.

invasion and conquest? ho chi minhs popularity in the south alone was over 75%, after all the american backed dictatorship and the ARVN were as oppresing as any communist state.

Right on Stalin, and he took the choice of Communism just to get the aid.

Read into what his Communist policies were, and you'll see him for what he really was, an opportunist.

Well stalin006, some people in this forum hate people just because they are communists so what do you expect?;) I hope you will get more interresting opinions.

In this case it's a sensitive subject, since most Americans look at him as a pretty big enemy.

But the biggest enemy in that war was ourselves.

Originally posted by Flatlander Fox
In this case it's a sensitive subject, since most Americans look at him as a pretty big enemy.

But the biggest enemy in that war was ourselves.

I know but it was more than 25 years ago. The vietnamieses don't hate Johnson and Nixon you know. For them the war is over.

that si true, it could be seen the times clinton went there

Originally posted by Flatlander Fox
Right on Stalin, and he took the choice of Communism just to get the aid.

Read into what his Communist policies were, and you'll see him for what he really was, an opportunist. He was a nationalist, as well as a Communist. He did join the Communist Party abroad first though, in France IIRC.

To his people, he was a national liberator, a hero, the latest in a long string of them guys, stretching fr the days when N Vietnam was a Chinese province around the first century BC. Although in those days, the national enemy was usually the Chinese.

I am no liberal, but I also judge a man on his conduct rather than his political party. From what I have seen he qualifies well on the generalship level. Certainly fought a better equipped enemy to a standstill.

I also see no reason to deny him based on the people's rejection of him, see eg Idi Amin or Castro. Granted he was never elected in the normal sense of the word, but there is a certain legitimacy based on the popular acceptance. On the whole, not covered in glory, but substantial.

J

PS At this point I might have to remove Castro from the list. 25 years ago he was just another dictator. After two generations, there is nothing else left. It's time the US normalized relations. Trade will make more inroads to ideology than sanctions ever did.

He was a nationalist, who failed in his attempt to get aid from the US (or better put, the US decided to back another ally, leaving him no other option), and he turned to the communist. As for being a communist, I would say it would be required to get aid. Nothing is free.