Vietnam's (meager) resources

Fellows, Jeffrey jmf9 at cdc.gov
Tue Jun 2 10:53:00 PDT 1998


What better demonstrations that Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Jeff

---------- From: Michael Perelman To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Subject: Re: Vietnam's (meager) resources Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 12:57PM

I always toyed with the idea that we fought in Vietnam because we had so little at stake. If we were willing to fight so hard there, just imagine what would happen to someone where we had strategic investments.

In the film, Burn, mentioned a few days ago, the British destroyed their "own" island to prove a point. In the same sense, Vietnam may have been a "demonstration project" to prove our resolve to fight communism.

Doug Henwood wrote:


> Why is it so hard to believe that the U.S. really *was* fighting
Communism
> in Vietnam? Why do we have to assume the war really was over some
precious
> natural resource? The domino effect may have been ludicrous in
strictly
> military terms, but if the U.S. hadn't spent the last 50 years
destroying
> socialist and nationalist revolutions (and the USSR), the world would
be a
> very different place.
>
> Doug

-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list