24-08-2004 22:48									#151
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom Let me guess, with pinpoint accuracy, using bombs that were careful not to kill Cambodians, only nasty North Vietnamese types. Pretty advanced machinery of war you have there Ned. But then you didn't want to believe your uncle might have bombed civilians in WWII. Tell me, how exactly from the vantage point of a B-52 do you accurately distinguish between a Cambodian village by the Mekong and a Communist supply point? When the idea surely, was that they looked entirely similar? Or are you suggesting that the Viet Cong and North Viet Namese troops put conveniently large targets overhead, saying: 'We love you long time, you bomb us' ?

Do you, or anyone, have independent sources to verify any of this communist propaganda?

	24-08-2004 22:50									#152
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Arrian When you start crossing those annoying lines on the map, Ned, I believe it is time for Congress to have a say. In this case, I do not see how being open about interdicting supply lines in Cambodia would've hurt us. It's not like the NVA didn't know we were trying to bomb them. The only reason for the secrecy was to get around Congress, and that's bullshit. -Arrian

That was not the ONLY reason. Sihanouk was OFFICIALLY neutral while privately supporting the bombing.

As to crossing the border issue, I the original Congressional authorization to Johnson clearly included the whole of SE Asia.

	24-08-2004 22:54									#153
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ned A commander in chief has full authority to conduct a war in a manner to win it and to protect the troops. When an enemy is basing in a so-called neutral country, that country is no longer neutral. It either supports interdiction or it becomes and enemy. In Cambodia's case, it became an ally.

The commander in chief, eh, Ned?

'In his own memoirs, 'White House Years', Kissinger claims that he usurped the customary chain of command whereby commanders in the field receive, or believe that they receive, their orders from the President and then the Secretary of Defense. He boasts that he, together with Haldeman, Alexander Haig and Colonel Ray Sitton, evolved "both a military and a diplomatic schedule" for the secret bombing of Cambodia.

.....

When Kissinger was finally exposed in Congress and the press for conducting unauthorized bombings, he weakly pleaded that the raids were not all that secret, really, because Prince Sihanouk of Cambodia had known of them.

He had to be reminded that a foreign princeling cannot give permission to an American bureaucrat to violate the United States Constitution.

Nor, for the matter of that, can he give permission to an American bureaucrat to slaughter large numbers of his "own" civilians.

It's difficult to imagine Bismarck cowering behind such a contemptible excuse. (Prince Sihanouk, it is worth remembering, later became an abject puppet of the Khmer Rouge.)

.....

The raids were flown by B-52 bombers which, it is important to note at the outset, fly at an altitude too high to be observed from the ground and carry immense tonnages of high explosive: they give no warning of approach and are incapable of accuracy or discrimination because of both their altitude and the mass of their shells. Between 18 March 1969 and May 1970, 3,630 such raids were flown across the Cambodian frontier. The bombing campaign began as it was to go on - with full knowledge of its effect on civilians, and with flagrant deceit by Mr Kissinger in this precise respect.

......

Having gained access to a pilot's radio, he tape-recorded the conversations between pilots on bombing missions over the Cambodian interior. On no occasion did they run any checks designed to reassure themselves and others that they were not bombing civilian targets. It had been definitely asserted, by named US government spokesmen, that such checks were run. Branfman handed the tapes to Sydney Schanberg, whose New York Times report on them was printed just before the Senate met to prohibit further blitzing of Cambodia (the very resolution that was flouted by Kissinger the following month).


.....

Thus, according to the Pentagon, the following are the casualty figures between the first Lyndon Johnson bombing halt in March 1968 and the same date in 1972:

Americans - 31,205

South Vietnamese regulars - 86,101

"Enemy" - 475,609

The US Senate Subcommittee on Refugees estimated that in the same four-year period rather more than three million civilians were killed, injured or rendered homeless. In the same four-year period, the United States dropped almost 4,500,000 tons of high explosive on Indochina. (The Pentagon's estimated total for the tonnage dropped in the entire Second World War is 2,044,000.) This total does not include massive sprayings of chemical defoliants and pesticides, the effects of which are still being registered by the region's ecology. Nor does it include the land-mines which detonate to this day.'

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/K...china_TOHK.html


'This is pure conjecture and communist propaganda.'

Ned

'I am sure it was less that 500,000 Cambodians killed, and I assure you it saved American lives in the thousands.'

Patroklos

So Patroklos and Ned- would you say the Pentagon and the U.S. Senate Sub Committee were hard line Commies, pinko Commies, or simply Commie Symp fellow travellers?


As for saving American lives- how does killing a non-combatant Cambodian rice farmer save an American life?

That's just bizarro world logic.


'Evidence from U.S. official documents, declassified in 1987, leaves no doubt that this US. terror was critical in Pol Pot's drive for power.

"They are using [the bombing] as the main theme of the propaganda," reported the C.I.A. Director of Operations on May 2, 1973.

"This approach has resulted in the successful recruitment of a number of young men [and] the propaganda has been most effective among refugees subjected to B-52 strikes." '

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/polpot.htm

	24-08-2004 22:54									#154
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The amount of munitions an personal miving through Cambodia was hardly "miniscule."

But lets just ask Kerry, he was there.

I would like to see even a communist source that claim 500,000. The number is simply ridiculous.

*Edited, need to read closer

Last edited by Patroklos on 24-08-2004 at 23:00

	24-08-2004 22:55									#155
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Ned If we even killed close to that in terms of NVA and Khmer body count, the bombing would be considered to be successful. I doubt whether we ever go more than 10,000 commies.

You might be correct in that only about 10K Vietnamese were killed, but since I was discussing the number of Camodians killed, that's irrelevent. When the bombing began, the KR were a tiny fringe organization. The devastation we wreaked on Cambodia turned them into a mas organization capable of bringing down Lon Nol.

BTW, the Vientamese did not support the Kmher Rouge. The KR and the Vietnamese were enemies with very different ideologies. The Vietnamese were Marxists. The KR was based on the writings of Robbspierre.

	24-08-2004 23:00									#156
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Was it not the Vietnamese (we were gone by then) that actually went into Cambodia and ousted the KR? Albiet late, but they did.

	24-08-2004 23:01									#157
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos The amount of munitions an personal miving through Cambodia was hardly "miniscule."

According to The Perfect War, the amount of material brought south on the HCMT was the equivalent of a truck or two a night. One of the main suppleriers for the VC turned out to be ARVN itself. ARVN was so sorrupt that an enormous amount of American supplies destined for ARVN were sold to the VC, not by the government, but by corrupt officers. IIRC, about 50% of the stuff we gave to SV ended up in enemy hands.

The problem was compounded because we pretended SV as an independent government, the U.S. couldn't go after the guys selling the weapons.

	24-08-2004 23:02									#158
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Give me chapter and verse. I have a copy of the White House years.

Kissinger kept the bombing secret from Congress in order to keep it SECRET. Sihanouk required secrecy as a condition of his permission to assualt communist bases.

	24-08-2004 23:03									#159
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Haven't read that book, but it smells like bull. The river traffic alone beats that.

I can't refute it for now though, so game on.

	24-08-2004 23:04									#160
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos Was it not the Vietnamese (we were gone by then) that actually went into Cambodia and ousted the KR? Albiet late, but they did.

Yup, but not beause of the killing fields. No one knew about them yet. The KR began raiding VN soon after the came to power. After three years of this, VN had enough and invaded in a move that was denounced by the U.S. Soon after, the U.S. began supplying the KR as a resistence against the VN, probably the most disgusting thing the U.S. has ever done.

	24-08-2004 23:05									#161
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Yes.

	24-08-2004 23:05									#162
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ned Give me chapter and verse. I have a copy of the White House years. Kissinger kept the bombing secret from Congress in order to keep it SECRET. Sihanouk required secrecy as a condition of his permission to assualt communist bases.

Secret from who? Like the Cambodians didn't know they were being bombed?

	24-08-2004 23:06									#163
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Secret from Congress, Ned. So that Congress couldn't stop it.

-Arrian

	24-08-2004 23:11									#164
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Arrian, Congress could only stop it if it stopped funding the war as a whole. That WAS a worry of the administration, true.

	24-08-2004 23:14									#165
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Secret from who? Like the Cambodians didn't know they were being bombed?

It interesting, is it not, that the commies who were being bombed never called the NYTimes to complain.

Why?

Officially, they were not there either.

	24-08-2004 23:16									#166
	Put an end to popups!

No, Ned. Congress had Constitutional authority to specifically prohibit involvement in Cambodia. In fact, they passed legislation doing just that in 1970.

	24-08-2004 23:18									#167
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos Was it not the Vietnamese (we were gone by then) that actually went into Cambodia and ousted the KR? Albiet late, but they did.

Yes.


And then the United States supported the Khmer Rouge.

Really puts the seal on the whole sorry involvement in Cambodia.


'The Vietnamese themselves don't even claim this, let alone over a four year period.'

Patroklos


I believe the figures you are partially quoting refer to civilians in South and North Viet Nam, Laos and Cambodia.


Note, it says 'Indo China' in the following sentence, which ain't just Cambodia.



Oh, Neddy?

I'm beginning to think what you know about the Khmer Rouge doesn't amount to much.

'1953: Cambodia receives independence from France. Pol Pot works on setting up a communist party.

1960-63: Pol Pot becomes party's general secretary. Flees into jungle to escape repression by Cambodia's ruler, Prince Norodom Sihanouk.

1967: Khmer Rouge take up arms against the government.

1970: Right-wing coup topples Sihanouk. U.S. invades Cambodia to dislodge Vietnamese from border sanctuaries, but drives them deeper into Cambodia where they join with Khmer Rouge. '

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/98...l.pot.timeline/

'Sept 30, 1960 - Pol Pot and other communists hold secret congress at Phnom Penh railway station and elect future Khmer Rouge leaders to top party posts. '

http://www.embassy.org/cambodia/press/chronology.html


'1960: Emergence of the Khmer Rouge organization, led by Pol Pot.

1970: Coup d’état by prime minister Lon Nol and proclamation of a republic. Sihanouk aligns with a faction of the Khmer Rouge. In the ensuing civil war he is supported by China and North Viet Nam, while the United States and South Viet Nam back Lon Nol.'

http://www.unesco.org/courier/1999_...ssier/txt07.htm

	24-08-2004 23:22									#168
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Molly, I just reviewed my copy of White House years. Your statements concerning Kissinger and keeping the bombing secret from the president are a

LIE!

	24-08-2004 23:25									#169
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ned Molly, I just reviewed my copy of White House years. Your statements concerning Kissinger and keeping the bombing secret from the president are a LIE!

Ned, classic troll.

	24-08-2004 23:26									#170
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ramo No, Ned. Congress had Constitutional authority to specifically prohibit involvement in Cambodia. In fact, they passed legislation doing just that in 1970.

Interesting. Give me a cite to the legislation.

Regardless, I still think a president has authority to conduct military operations against an enemy whereever he finds them.

	24-08-2004 23:27									#171
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

NO, not if congress specifically forbid a certain action.

	24-08-2004 23:29									#172
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by GePap Ned, classic troll.

[Jack Nicholson intonation] You can't handle the truth! [/Jack Nicholson intonation]

	24-08-2004 23:31									#173
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by GePap NO, not if congress specifically forbid a certain action.

Congress cannot pass legislation on its own.

It needs the signature of the president or it has to override his veto.

As a constitutional lawyer, though, I STILL think that Congress cannot interfere with combat operations the president deems necessary to conduct an authorized war.

	24-08-2004 23:32									#174
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by GePap NO, not if congress specifically forbid a certain action.

Just how would congress do that? Congress controls the purse but has no authority over the executive branch except through impeachment.

	24-08-2004 23:34									#175
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Interesting. Give me a cite to the legislation.

It's called the War Powers Act.

http://www.luminet.net/~tgort/wpa.htm

It was originally passed after Nixon's invasion of Cambodia in 1970 - then vetoed - then passed again and signed in 1973.

	24-08-2004 23:35									#176
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Just how would congress do that? Congress controls the purse but has no authority over the executive branch except through impeachment.

Look bellow your post.

	24-08-2004 23:36									#177
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Molly, strictly from memory, the Khmer were funded by China and supplied by the North Vietnam. They got very little in the way of supplies while Sihanouk was in power because he was officially neutral. When he was overthrown, the kids gloves came off and the North Vietnamese began to give the Khmer ample supplies in an effort to overthrow the government of Cambodia.

	24-08-2004 23:36									#178
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

[crosspost. To Ned:]

Even if that is the case (which I'll concede since I am not a constitutional lawyer), there was another group to keep the bombing secret from: the general population of the United States, who could have reacted by voting Nixon out.

Oh, here's a question: could the Nixon administration's bombing of Cambodia have been basis for impeachment? I mean, after all, lying about a blowjob was...

-Arrian

Damn, poly's being slow again

	24-08-2004 23:37									#179
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Ramo, not even Clinton abided by the War Powers Act. It's constitutionality is suspect.

	24-08-2004 23:41									#180
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Arrian [crosspost. To Ned:] Even if that is the case (which I'll concede since I am not a constitutional lawyer), there was another group to keep the bombing secret from: the general population of the United States, who could have reacted by voting Nixon out. Oh, here's a question: could the Nixon administration's bombing of Cambodia have been basis for impeachment? I mean, after all, lying about a blowjob was... -Arrian Damn, poly's being slow again

Well, the Demoncrats certainly tried to make it article of Impeachment.

The problem of keeping such things secret lead to the formation of select committees to receive top secret information in order that Congress be officially informed as required by the Constitution. This happened after the war was over.