Westernstarr, Repeat: It was 1st of all an invasion, it was for Vietnam's interest. The liberation or more precisely the rescue was only a by-product.
The invasion was decided on & launched when Vietnam saw no hope of ending the conflict by negotiations. Soriya On Dec 24, 7:21 am, Westernstarr <[email protected]> wrote: > But why didn't Vietnam do it earlier, not waiting till after 2 million > death ? > > > > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Soriya <[email protected]> wrote: > > > jayakhmer, > > > > The war of 1979 and its aftermath generate this lingering question > > whether the > > > war was an invasion or liberation. > > > The war was both an invasion & a liberation, or, more precisely, an > > invasion & a rescue. Vietnam invaded Pol Pot's Cambodia. It had the > > right to do so because the 2 countries were in war. The liberation or > > more precisely the rescue of the Cambodian people from the genocide by > > the bloody hands of Pol Pot & the Khmer Rouge were a by-product of the > > invasion. Although it was a by-product, it was a > > liberation or more precisely a rescue nonetheless. What would happen > > to Cambodia if Vietnam hadn't invaded?? A Cambodia with a population > > of less than a > > million all of whom are illiterate?? You bet!! > > > Of the following 2 options, which one would you choose?? > > > 1) Vietnam invaded Pol Pot's Cambodia, thus as a by-product ended his > > killing spree of the Cambodian people, & withdrew its troops from > > Cambodia 10 years later, > > > 2) Vietnam didn't invade Pol Pot's Cambodia, & thus Pol Pot & Co > > continued their massacre of the Cambodian people. > > > > Can we move beyond this debate? I think we can and we should. > > > The Khmer Rouge & their sympathizers here in CamDisc will never move > > beyond this debate. They want & are trying to revenge Vietnam for > > ending their reign of terror. > > > > It would be easy to decide if the warring parties were all foreign forces > > against > > > Cambodian's. The complexity increases exponentially when Cambodians > > > collaborated with the invasion forces. Battalions of the Khmer > > Resistance Force > > > of the United Front for National Salvation of Kampuchea (UFNSK) fought > > side by > > > side with the Vietnamese forces. > > > The UFNSK were Khmer Rouge factions who opposed the genocide. The > > opportunity arrived for them to rescue the Cambodian people when the > > Vietnam/Khmer Rouge war broke out. Who else can they ask for help to > > rescue the Cambodian people?? They knew that for Vietnam it was > > Vietnam's interest that was the most important. But again, who else > > would come to save the Cambodian people?? The Thais?? They treated the > > Cambodian refugees in Thailand as street dogs!! Can you rely on them?? > > > > Was it an invasion or a liberation? > > > It was both an invasion & a liberation, or more precisely an invasion > > & a rescue. > > > > To Vietnam it was a conquest and an invasion. It was Vietnam's > > Machiavellian > > > approach to settling disputes between its weaker neighbors. What were > > border > > > skirmishes between the former allies during the Vietnam War against the > > U.S. > > > became a full-blown war between Vietnam and the Democratic Kampuchea (DK) > > > as the two nations deeply divided between the Soviet and the Chinese > > camp. > > > Pol Pot, emboldened by his then so far success in his efforts to try > > to wipe out the Cambodian nation from the face of the earth without > > any resistance from the Cambodian people, didn't agree to Vietnam's > > request for negotiations to end the conflict. He even "invaded" > > Vietnamese villages along the border & massacred 1,000s of innocent > > Vietnamsese civilians. > > > What do you expect?? Do you expect the Vietnamese to sit still & wait > > for the Khmer Rouge to come to cut off their heads?? > > > What about you, if you're in war with Vietnam & you're stronger than > > it, wouldn't you invade it to try to end the war?? > > > > In my mind, the war would have been a liberation if it was conceived and > > planned > > > by the leadership of UFNSK. The UFNSK was promulgated as a resistance > > force > > > in Snoul, Kratie on December 2, 1978 by which time the Vietnamese > > generals > > > had meticulously planned the war, and the preparations for war were > > already > > > completed. While it is conceivable that the Vietnamese generals may have > > > consulted with its Cambodian counterparts, the records, thus far, showed > > that the > > > Vietnamese generals were the brains behind the invasion. > > > If the Vietnamese generals hadn't consulted with the UFNSK, what would > > you do?? They were in war against Pol Pot's Cambodia, if they hadn't > > consulted with Pol Pot's Cambodian opponents, what would you do?? They > > were in war against Pol Pot's Cambodia, who says they had to consult > > with Pol Pot's Cambodian opponents?? > > > > In " The Tale of the Five Generals," Pribbenow II described the war > > planning and > > > execution in breath taking details. "The Vietnamese army spent all of > > 1978 > > > drafting and training new recruits, calling up reservists, rebuilding > > under strength > > > units, and converting military 'economic construction' groups back into > > regular > > > combat units." > > > That's right. At that time I lived in Saigon. I heard that the > > Vietnamese government even recruited the soldiers of the "ancient" > > regime to go to fight the Khmer Rouge. How about ther Khmer Rouge?? Oh > > yeah, they didn't recruit, they only killed. How "smart"!! > > > > The war was scheduled to begin on January 1,1979. The KR made a > > preemptive > > > move by attacking Vietnam on December 21 and 22 of 1978. The Vietnamese > > > and UFNSK force responded and capture Phnom Penh on January 7, 1979. > > > See, how "intelligent" the Khmer Rouge leaders were!! > > > > The Khmer Rouge's systematic killing of its citizens made an invasion a > > welcome > > > relief for many Cambodians. > > > Not just for "many" Cambodians, it was for ALL non-Khmer-Rouge > > Cambodians. > > > > On the one hand, the invasion stopped the killing. Without the invasion, > > the > > > alternative could have been very gloom for many Cambodians. Clearly, the > > U.S. > > > could not have rescued Cambodians from the KR – the Vietnam War was too > > > fresh for the U.S to return to the region; the Soviet Union was already > > Vietnam's > > > staunchest ally; and China supported the KR. > > > That's right. > > > > On the other hand, the invasion has been a constant source of criticism > > and > > > mistrust for the current government many of whose members served in the > > > UFNSK that became the government of Cambodia after the 1979 invasion. > > > The criticism is rooted in 2 sources: 1) the Khmer Rouge themselves, & > > 2) racial hatred. > > > Number 1 is understandable. For number 2, it's very hard to educate > > the Khmers. It's virtually impossible to make them understand that the > > past is the past, that in the past the Vietnamese were bad to the > > Khmers and the Khmers were also bad to the Vietnamese, that it's ok & > > even good that they should look back at it to learn from it but > > shouldn't live in it, that now is the present & thus that they should > > take the present conditions into consideration. > > > It's even impossible to convince them that had Vietnam not invaded Pol > > Pot's Cambodia, Pol Pot & Co would have eliminated all the non-Khmer- > > Rouge Cambodian people from the face of the earth, including even > > them. > > > By "Khmers" I mean the Khmer Rouge & their Khmer buddies, both are > > here in CamDisc. > > > > In the coming weeks, the debates about the war will go on. As more and > > more > > > information about the war is available, I encourage my fellow Cambodians > > to read, > > > research for more information, and to come to your own conclusion. > > > They have already come to their own conclusion, a long time ago. For > > them, there's no need to read or research anything. > > > > I have concluded that the war was an invasion, and that the Royal > > Government of > > > Cambodia, while pursuing a peaceful and friendly relation with Vietnam, > > should be > > > free to determine its own destiny. Cambodia does not owe Vietnam > > anything. > > > Vietnam did what Vietnam had to do to deal with the DK government. > > Vietnam > > > defeated the KR. It accomplished its mission. > > > - Right, the war was an invasion. > > - The Cambodian government is free to determine its own destiny. > > - Right, Cambodia doesn't owe Vietnam anything. > > - Good, Vietnam defeated the evil murderers Khmer Rouge. It > > accomplished its > > mission. It withdrew its troops from Cambodia almost 20 years ago, > > in 1989. > > > > Cambodia based on its current bilateral relationships with the rest of > > the world > > > and especially with China and the U.S. seems to be free of its neighbor's > > > influence. It is up to all of us to find a way to put our past behind us > > and to focus > > > on the future. > > > Agree 101%. Just an addition: focus also on the present, in addition > > to the future. > > > > The prime minister has stated that he will be serving as prime minister > > again after > > > the 2013 election. The implication is Cambodian People's Party (CPP) > > will win > > > again. The prime minister may be correct in his prediction if the > > opposition > > > parties fail to unite and fail to inspire a simple majority of Cambodians > > to vote for > > > change. > > > Everything is up to the Cambodian people, as long as the election is > > free & fair. The opposition parties must show the Cambodian people > > that they can be better than the CPP. The Cambodian people are of > > course smarter than the barbarians here in Camdisc. They even don't > > buy Sam Rainsy racial-hatred rhetoric, which he used in the futile > > hope that he could incite them to hate the CPP & thus to vote for him. > > > > Based on past performance, it is highly likely that the opposition > > parties will fail > > > again unless they are serious about winning by making drastic changes in > > the > > > messages and leadership. > > > First of all, they must get rid of their naming their parties after an > > individual. I've never seen or heard any political party anywhere else > > in the world that's named after an individual. > > > > With all due respect to prime minister, the picture > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cambodia Discussion (CAMDISC) - www.cambodia.org" group. This is an unmoderated forum. Please refrain from using foul language. Thank you for your understanding. Peace among us and in Cambodia. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/camdisc Learn more - http://www.cambodia.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
