Guest writer Simon Smith reviewing one of the latest books on the American War in Vietnam.

Kill Anything that Moves - The Real American War in Vietnam is a compelling and fascinating account andexplanation of why and how the American war machine killed so many Vietnamese civilians by design rather than by accident. It is a history book written about the atrocity which was the Vietnam War and the countless smaller atrocities which were part of the bigger picture. It is a book written in simplified, layman’s terms which doesn’t test your concentration but taxes your ability to soak up details of horror and atrocity.

The writer, Nick Turse, sets out to show that war crimes like the My Lai massacre were not at all exceptional or isolated. The term “a few bad apples” raises its ugly head as it does now and again here in Northern Ireland. In fact I found many examples of military practices during the Vietnam War which occurred here in Northern Ireland but perhaps that should be a topic for another time.

The book takes its name from the response to the question from a US. soldier to his superior officer before the My Lai massacre in which 500 unarmed civilians were killed by the occupying U.S. troops. He asked ‘Are we supposed to kill women and children?’ to which his Commanding Officer replied ‘Kill everything that moves.’

The author begins with the obligatory history lesson on the roots of the Vietnam War but does so with panache, giving even the seasoned reader on the subject an informative, detailed, concise and absorbing account. Facts are laid bare like how the forerunner of the CIA funded the Viet Minh in its war against the occupying Japanese during the Second World War only for the Americans to support the French during a nascent Cold War up to the point where the US was funding 80% of the cost of the French war in Vietnam as early as 1953. This seems analogous to some of the more recent conflicts involving the US. There was also talk about “winning hearts and minds” although how this could be done with a scorched earth policy is anybody’s guess.

In another book I read called Women and Revolution in Vietnam by Arlene Eisen, she explains that the US authorities invented the term Viet Cong, meaning Vietnamese Communists, to disguise the fact that the next incarnation of fighters after the Viet Minh, the National Liberation Front was formed as an eclectic umbrella organisation that united businessmen, workers, trade unions, women, youth, peasants, students, writers and artists. The Americans wanted to disguise the fact that the NLF had popular support.

During basic training the US Army recruits were dehumanised and so too, to a greater extent, were the Vietnamese soldiers and civilians alike. Taught to chant “Kill, Kill, Kill” and with no training in the Geneva Conventions, they referred to all Vietnamese as "gooks" or "slants", never mind "Viet Cong", even before they left the States.

I suspect Turse’s explanation of why ordinary teenage boys can become murderers and war-criminals was based on that of Philip Caputo’s in his book A Rumor of War. One paragraph explains:

Angry troops primed to lash out, often following losses within the unit; civilians trapped in their path; and officers in the field issuing ambiguous or illegal orders to young men conditioned to obey - that was the basic recipe for many of the mass killings carried out by army soldiers and marines over the years.

Also involved were napalm, defoliants, huge bombs dropped from B-52 planes etc. He goes on to explain that indiscriminate civilian death was the inevitable outcome of 'deliberate decisions made long before, at the highest levels of the military.'

The book is a meticulous study of the “American War” as the Vietnamese call it, based on interviews and research including substantiated war crimes investigations and court-martial records. The author often found the same problem with military records as John Stevens found with those of the RUC, they had simply vanished or had been destroyed.

From the policy makers at the top, to middle ranking officers’ demands for a high "body-count" no matter what, to the sniper picking off as many farmers as possible to boost the kill rate or the "Double Veterans" who murdered those who they had just raped, from helicopters playing "gook-hunting" or drivers of huge military trucks playing "gook-hockey" the story of why so many civilians were killed is told convincingly.

Many of the civilian homes had underground bunkers, often L or Z-shaped to protect against grenades. Every time a person emerged from a bunker they knew, Turse explains, that 'An instant too late could mean death, but potentially a second too early was potentially no less lethal.'

There were many dissenting voices within the military at all levels but pressure, policy and cover-ups left many perpetrators with medals and promotions rather than prison sentences.

It is a harrowing book, horrific details stay with you long after they have been read. The descriptions, so anathematic to the human mind, will leave their mark. I found one face amongst many in the included photographs provoking and together with the photos of the Vietnamese interviewees I found myself a little overcome with emotion. No wonder so many people who have actually witnessed or partook in horrific situations suffer Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (or "Battle Fatigue" or "Shell Shock" as it has previously been called).

I would recommend this book to anyone except the reader who may find the graphic content upsetting. It would be perfect as someone’s first book on the subject as it gives a general history as well as a much needed perspective. Turse uses analysis and explanation skilfully to paint a cruel picture, trying as best he can to remain unbiased with his damning research.

As well as the many photographs there is an index, a map and the most extensive "notes" section I have seen in years betraying the fact that the book was thoroughly researched and well written.

Nick Turse, 2013, Kill Anything That Moves. Metropolitan Books: New York. ISBN 9780805086911

Kill Anything That Moves


Guest writer Simon Smith reviewing one of the latest books on the American War in Vietnam.

Kill Anything that Moves - The Real American War in Vietnam is a compelling and fascinating account andexplanation of why and how the American war machine killed so many Vietnamese civilians by design rather than by accident. It is a history book written about the atrocity which was the Vietnam War and the countless smaller atrocities which were part of the bigger picture. It is a book written in simplified, layman’s terms which doesn’t test your concentration but taxes your ability to soak up details of horror and atrocity.

The writer, Nick Turse, sets out to show that war crimes like the My Lai massacre were not at all exceptional or isolated. The term “a few bad apples” raises its ugly head as it does now and again here in Northern Ireland. In fact I found many examples of military practices during the Vietnam War which occurred here in Northern Ireland but perhaps that should be a topic for another time.

The book takes its name from the response to the question from a US. soldier to his superior officer before the My Lai massacre in which 500 unarmed civilians were killed by the occupying U.S. troops. He asked ‘Are we supposed to kill women and children?’ to which his Commanding Officer replied ‘Kill everything that moves.’

The author begins with the obligatory history lesson on the roots of the Vietnam War but does so with panache, giving even the seasoned reader on the subject an informative, detailed, concise and absorbing account. Facts are laid bare like how the forerunner of the CIA funded the Viet Minh in its war against the occupying Japanese during the Second World War only for the Americans to support the French during a nascent Cold War up to the point where the US was funding 80% of the cost of the French war in Vietnam as early as 1953. This seems analogous to some of the more recent conflicts involving the US. There was also talk about “winning hearts and minds” although how this could be done with a scorched earth policy is anybody’s guess.

In another book I read called Women and Revolution in Vietnam by Arlene Eisen, she explains that the US authorities invented the term Viet Cong, meaning Vietnamese Communists, to disguise the fact that the next incarnation of fighters after the Viet Minh, the National Liberation Front was formed as an eclectic umbrella organisation that united businessmen, workers, trade unions, women, youth, peasants, students, writers and artists. The Americans wanted to disguise the fact that the NLF had popular support.

During basic training the US Army recruits were dehumanised and so too, to a greater extent, were the Vietnamese soldiers and civilians alike. Taught to chant “Kill, Kill, Kill” and with no training in the Geneva Conventions, they referred to all Vietnamese as "gooks" or "slants", never mind "Viet Cong", even before they left the States.

I suspect Turse’s explanation of why ordinary teenage boys can become murderers and war-criminals was based on that of Philip Caputo’s in his book A Rumor of War. One paragraph explains:

Angry troops primed to lash out, often following losses within the unit; civilians trapped in their path; and officers in the field issuing ambiguous or illegal orders to young men conditioned to obey - that was the basic recipe for many of the mass killings carried out by army soldiers and marines over the years.

Also involved were napalm, defoliants, huge bombs dropped from B-52 planes etc. He goes on to explain that indiscriminate civilian death was the inevitable outcome of 'deliberate decisions made long before, at the highest levels of the military.'

The book is a meticulous study of the “American War” as the Vietnamese call it, based on interviews and research including substantiated war crimes investigations and court-martial records. The author often found the same problem with military records as John Stevens found with those of the RUC, they had simply vanished or had been destroyed.

From the policy makers at the top, to middle ranking officers’ demands for a high "body-count" no matter what, to the sniper picking off as many farmers as possible to boost the kill rate or the "Double Veterans" who murdered those who they had just raped, from helicopters playing "gook-hunting" or drivers of huge military trucks playing "gook-hockey" the story of why so many civilians were killed is told convincingly.

Many of the civilian homes had underground bunkers, often L or Z-shaped to protect against grenades. Every time a person emerged from a bunker they knew, Turse explains, that 'An instant too late could mean death, but potentially a second too early was potentially no less lethal.'

There were many dissenting voices within the military at all levels but pressure, policy and cover-ups left many perpetrators with medals and promotions rather than prison sentences.

It is a harrowing book, horrific details stay with you long after they have been read. The descriptions, so anathematic to the human mind, will leave their mark. I found one face amongst many in the included photographs provoking and together with the photos of the Vietnamese interviewees I found myself a little overcome with emotion. No wonder so many people who have actually witnessed or partook in horrific situations suffer Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (or "Battle Fatigue" or "Shell Shock" as it has previously been called).

I would recommend this book to anyone except the reader who may find the graphic content upsetting. It would be perfect as someone’s first book on the subject as it gives a general history as well as a much needed perspective. Turse uses analysis and explanation skilfully to paint a cruel picture, trying as best he can to remain unbiased with his damning research.

As well as the many photographs there is an index, a map and the most extensive "notes" section I have seen in years betraying the fact that the book was thoroughly researched and well written.

Nick Turse, 2013, Kill Anything That Moves. Metropolitan Books: New York. ISBN 9780805086911

35 comments:

  1. Simon,
    I doubt very few Americans got off unscathed the brutality of Vietnam just appears to go on and on.
    The battle for hearts and minds lost many their limbs and souls.

    It is a great review but I don't think I could cope with the graphics.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Simon-

    A great review on how big some get when they are fully armed and the locals have their arms up-

    " Kill everything that moves " says the American CO on the ground-

    It's a pity that the Rednecks and other invaders at My Lai
    Did not shoot each other as they moved to gun down a people-dumb and young is no excuse for being a murderer or for giving insane orders to young troops-the average age of a American solider in Vietnam was 19-that must have been their IQ also-And those American soldiers fathers died fighting the nazi's-

    ReplyDelete
  3. An interesting review that expands on General Westmoreland’s policy of search and destroy which would include kill anything that moves.
    I think the hearts and minds were for PR purposes only which makes little sense in a televised war.

    I think that was something the American military regretted but they had the bright idea that they could show the people in the USA how they were dealing with the red menace.
    Westmoreland telling president Johnson shortly after the battle of Dak To that the end was in sight arrogance or a military blunder that lead to the reduction of troops on the ground.
    A year or so later the Tet offensive kicked off north and south stretching the Americans who in the end managed to recover militarily but lost severely politically.

    Will definitely pick up a copy as I prefer the term kill anything that moves to the less threatening search and destroy basically the same thing but one has a more innocent ring to it

    ReplyDelete
  4. Simon,

    by sheer chance I picked up Last Night I Dreamed of Peace in a used bookshop today.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mickey,

    I think you are blaming the soldiers rather than the military and politic policy you would have to remember that the yanks were in Vietnam but dealing with the Cuban missile crisis 90 miles of their coast.
    So the Red menace was at their door and it didn’t take much persuasion to prop up the South Vietnamese government prior to that.

    Strange how the Second World War would end up spawning proxy wars for both super powers then.
    Take a look at the Korean War the communist backed north and the American backed south never did sign a peace treaty so technically they are still at war.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tain Bo-

    In a war I never subscribed to the term ordinary soldier and it's rare for any solider to make it home without leaving part of his/ her mind in the war-who ever put the young person in the front line has that responsibility and has to take the blame but most soldiers who fought and those that want out of their way to kill civilians know the difference amongst themselves-murderers did not come about because they joined a army-they were always murderers-and it did not matter how well the other 99 per cent fought-people always remember the cruel over the brave-

    The Cuban missile crisis was a Russian ruse which worked despite what history tells us about president Kennedy-the Russians forced him to remove his missiles from Turkey-which was the reason why the missiles were sent to Cuba in the first place-Kennedy came out a winner that time because he had a soft media who lauded him over his ' Victory '-

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mickey,

    We would like to believe all wars are fought with honour and adhere to a code of conduct and ethics.
    When the Red army reached Berlin they committed serious war crimes, hell, that was even before they reached Berlin.
    But the Nazis lost so history does not look at it that way.

    I am not making excuses for the American soldiers in Vietnam I just don’t read it as black and white.
    They knew what they were doing and in some cases just for the sake of the all important body count rather than go too far beyond the wire they would shoot civilians and claim they were VC or VC sympathisers.

    On a miniature scale we had the same problem of civilians being killed for no reason and that was in a low intensity conflict.
    In an all out war it would be natural to want to kill the enemy or anything that looked like the enemy.
    As the review suggests they were mental killers long before they got shipped off and the transition would have been just as quick to actual killers.

    I doubt the entire half a million US troops where all killers of civilians but I would say that there were those that did kill civilians.
    At 19 stuck in a jungle following orders would have been seen as the smartest way to survive kill or be killed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tain Bo-

    " When the Red army reached Berlin they committed serious war crimes "- to true-but was the communist cause to blame for those crimes or those soldiers-

    The RAF committed war crimes when they dropped incendiary bombs on German civilian targets including Berlin homes but they are also seen as hero's-was their royalty at fault or their orders-

    I am reading Two Brothers by Ben Elton at the moment and I have said it here before that some of the bravest people that ever lived were those few Germans who stood up to the nazi's in the late 30s when they were at their highest power within Germany-

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nice review. It will encourage me (for one) to seek it out.

    For another complementary analysis, which I think still very perceptive, see 'The Perfect War- Technowar in Vietnan' (Gibson)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFvcuuS5eUI

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mickey,

    Of course the English and Americans committed war crimes the bombing of Dresden in the closing months of war was not necessary.

    There were many dissenters rounded up during the 30s and many lost their lives before the Nazis took the reigns.

    The Treaty of Versailles has a lot to answer for even to this day the carving up of the world can trace many problems right back to it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tanks deliberately firebombed Tokyo knowing the city was mostly wooden. HEROS welcome and a band on arrival home. Wont even mention nukes....oh shit, just did. My BAD.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Tain Bo- "They knew what they were doing and in some cases just for the sake of the all important body count rather than go too far beyond the wire they would shoot civilians and claim they were VC or VC sympathisers."

    Nick Turse explains the myriad ways in which the all important body-count was sought. It was often with bullying and obsessiveness to the point where one general, called Julien Ewell, was described as being "psychologically unbalanced" and "berserk" about it. He was known as the 'Butcher of the Delta' who during operation "Speedy Express" which involved in Turse's words "nonstop death for half a year across thousands of square miles densely crowded with civilians".

    The U.S.'s own figures of civilian dead in those 6 months of "Speedy Express" was between 5,000 and 7,000 (the majority of those killed). Purely to increase the body count and kill ratios which were up to 134:1 per month. The 5 to 6 million Delta inhabitants endured 6,500 air strikes involving 5078 tonnes of bombs and 1784 tonnes of Napalm. There were also 311,083 artillery rounds during only four of these six months.

    It doesn't take a mathematician to work out your chances of survival were slim. Non-fatal casualty figures were much, much higher.

    In the last months of "Speedy Express" General Ewell was awarded a third star and promoted up the chain to command the largest U.S. combat command in the world at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  13. AM- "Last Night I Dreamed of Peace" is a beautiful book. The Vietnamese won the war with people who had the extraordinary passion and idealism of the young woman diarist. General Giap at the helm and a fervent, resourceful people outfoxed superior technology and career Generals.

    General Giap was outspoken, in the years before his death, about some of the recent abuses by the Vietnamese government and I admire a person with integrity.

    I would say the diarist in question, Dang Thuy Tram, also had integrity, honesty and bravery as well. I hope you enjoy her diary.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Great review... Book would be a worthy read.

    Vietnam war vets throw medals back at Washington

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIi4cVOrgyg

    or just go to youtube and input the above title.


    ReplyDelete
  15. Vid link below this
    2012 Iraq Veterans Against the War held a ceremony where nearly 50 veterans discarded their war medals by hurling them down the street in the direction of the NATO summit. We hear the soldiers' voices as they return their medals one by one from the stage. "I am giving back my global war on terror service medal in solidarity with the people of Iraq and Afghanistan," said Jason Heard, a former combat medic who spent 10 years in the U.S. Army. "I am deeply sorry for the destruction that we have caused in these countries and around the globe." - DemocracyNow.org

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM4bHxKUKVs

    ReplyDelete
  16. Mary,

    it is such an evocative review that I am determined to read this book.

    Simon,

    Ewell seems to have been just one more of those who was born too late and in the wrong country to have stood trial at Nuremburg.

    I might start Dang Thuy Tram next.

    As always in these matters I am drawing back to the immortal words of the dying John McGuffin: there are so many good books to read and there are still bastards writing more.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anthony if you read 'Last Night I Dreamed of Peace' take the time to read the introduction as it gives the context of the diary and also how it was discovered.

    As for Ewell standing trial, soldiers' evidence was hidden, spooks intimidated witnesses and all sorts of cover-ups took place. The 9th Division was described by a whistle-blower as carrying out a My Lai a month during his tenure.

    Nowadays the U.S. have somehow opted out of the International Criminal Court even though International Law dictates all countries are bound by laws against war crimes and crimes against humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Simon,

    although in a more ad hoc fashion we still hear the body count policy in Iraq and Afghanistan though the civilian populace always differs from the official count.
    Where an official count might suggest 20 combatants were killed the locals dispute saying that civilians were amongst that number.

    It is not as pervasive as it was in Vietnam were the body count was a measure of progress for career generals.
    I remember reading about operation Linebacker and its extension Linebacker 2
    Were the official estimated civilian casualties’ were 1600 supposedly yet there was no release of military casualties. I think the 1600 count was from Linebacker 2 but giving the area they bombed I don’t see how they came up with such a low number.

    It would be hard to imagine when the B 52 bombers dropped their payload that much would survive but you wouldn’t have to get creative guesstimating the civilian casualty toll.

    We can’t go by Ewell’s figures on one occasion he claims 11000 enemy dead but less than a thousand weapons were captured.
    Then in another report claiming 20,000 enemy dead and exactly 2000 weapons captured which would mean either 18000 combatants were unarmed or more likely were civilians.

    He should have retired after World War 2.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Tain Bo- "He should have retired after World War 2."

    It may have been a better world for the Vietnamese civilians but without his obsessing over body-counts he couldn't have shown that he was a 'good soldier', one who produces 'results' and 'high kill ratios'. It was all about the struggle for power and promotion. A struggle in which many career soldiers took part in.

    It happened with total disregard for civilians. Civilians were just numbers to be included in the body-counts and chalked up on blackboards.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Simon,

    I was reading an article about a documentary that will be aired in March.
    It is being touted as the lost film of Dak To which probably means the American government released at after all these years.
    I have never heard of the channel it will be shown on but will keep an eye out if and when it shows up on the web.

    Definitely a ruthless career soldier but since the brass in the White house and pentagon were not complaining the only people he had to answer too agreed with his tactics.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Tain Bo- As coincidence would have it in this month's History Ireland magazine James Hughes, a professor of comparative politics at the London School of Economics, and director of it's Conflict Research Group writes about Brigadier Frank Kitson:

    "In his evidence to the Saville Enquiry Kitson downplayed his expertise in counter-insurgency, but his books had forwards by leading army generals, and his international reputation in the field was recognised by his inclusion in a small group of foreign military officers brought to the USA for a RAND symposium on counterinsurgency in 1962, anticipating an escalating US involvement in South Vietnam."

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Simon,

    unfortunately I had 6 different articles open and meant to add the article to refer back to.
    I can’t recall the name but the so called lost film will of course be from the American perspective. I will keep looking for it as sooner or later it should be streaming on the web and not some obscure TV station.

    Kitson and French Colonel Roger Trinquier are no different Trinquier was not behind the door when it came to torturing people were as Kitson denies he was an advocate of torture but it was widely used in NI.

    They differ as Trinquier believed that torture for human intelligence was key in winning quick victories were as Kitson seen it as the long haul that would be key in winning the war but still employed torture as a means of gaining information and more so as a way of telling his adversaries we are watching you.

    As for common law proving negligence in war is the tricky thing even though bloody Sunday speaks for itself it becomes a form of mock justice as they are conducting an investigation of their own actions and will down play the role.
    Can justice be delivered fairly or does it become a victim of counter insurgency a necessity to defeat the enemy. Where the law is unofficially observed but not strictly enforced as to keep the enemy confused and wearing them down through attrition.

    ReplyDelete
  23. That is an interesting article Anthony. And this line or three...

    Amazooglebook search history. (Yes, the fading old-tech firms Amazon, Google, and Facebook merged in 2033.) You also get a tax break these days if you log into one of the government’s immersive propaganda portals. (Nope, “propaganda” doesn’t have negative connotations anymore.)

    It doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to envisage that happening in the not to near distant..

    ReplyDelete
  24. Though brave men ran in my family... an occasional one stayed and fought!

    One in particular went the whole distance.

    A cousin of my late father was a hard drinking career soldier, thirty year man in the US Air Force (Regiment Sgt. Major).
    He enlisted just before the US entered the World War 2 and fought as a machine gunner on bombers. During his WW2 service he was wounded in action on a mission in the South Pacific and received his first 'Purple Heart'. He was also awarded 'The Silver Star Medal' for valour and gallantry in action when on one operation the cockpit and the guys up there were seriously shot up, Frank and the other crew members brought the bomber home safely. 'Two turning, two burning' stuff by all accounts.

    'Uncle Frank' as he was know to me and my brothers went on to serve in the Korean war and later in Vietnam.

    Almost twenty years ago I represented 'the old sod' side of the family at his funeral in Chicago... (full military honours)... At my mother's insistence I had brought from Ireland some soil from my father's grave in the family plot and a baby-powers bottle of 'Holy Water' from the Chapel where Frank's father was christened... Of course the 'Yanks' loved the symbolic gesture and were thrilled in include them in the ceremonies.

    But back to the point of my post...at the funeral home when Frank was laid out, in uniform, with his medals and ribbons arranged in a display case alongside the casket, his son, my second cousin and a Commander in the US Navy informed me that Frank never wore his ribbons or medals for his service in either Korea nor Vietnam for he was of the opinion that neither were legitimate campaigns because no declaration of war had been mandated by the US congress in either case.

    ( President Harry S. Truman declared the war a “police action” because he never asked Congress to pass an official declaration of war. He thereby established a precedent for President Lyndon Johnson, who committed troops to the Vietnam War without ever seeking a congressional mandate for his action.)

    Ref: Korean War Definition, Cultural Dictionary, American Heritage.

    Post Script; Believe it or not Frank was born on the 4th of July... (only a 365 to 1 shot)

    ReplyDelete
  25. AM- An interesting follow-up to reading the book by Turse. I also have "Embers of War" by Frederik Logevall which is mentioned on that linked page above.

    The video link on the last page of the interview with Turse is extremely interesting. It is mentioned on the video, one point I purposely omitted, about how the book came about. I left it out because the story of how he found the documents is fascinating in itself but even more so when actually reading the book. The video however does it justice.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Henry JoY

    “Though brave men ran in my family... an occasional one stayed and fought!

    One in particular went the whole distance”

    That is some military distance from world war two through Vietnam and Korea.

    Korea was a confusing war with General Douglas MacArthur eventually wanting to invade China.
    I was wondering the other night about this article and thought it would be interesting if a Vietnam era soldier shared his experience views here.

    Your Uncle must have told a few stories over the years just the thought of being a tail gunner in a bomber plane given the mission survival odds at the time I would think you would have to be slightly more than brave.

    Just a thought you should put an article together about him can’t speak for anyone else but it would be an interesting read for me.

    The polite political policy of Police Action is a load of bunk they were both extremely violent wars.
    I sincerely doubt if you asked any of the soldiers at the battle for Inchon that they would call it a police action.

    Thanks for sharing that piece of your families history.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Interesting take on the book:

    https://cross-currents.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/e-journal/articles/zinoman_kulik.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  28. I found the Berkeley link lacking in validity although to be honest I got as far as the point where they write about the young soldier implicated in the rape and murder of a young woman by forcing her to travel with their patrol.

    They use this incident to rubbish Turse by saying the young soldier wasn't ordered to do that. Turse's point was that the the campaign of wholesale destruction and the dehumanising of the Vietnamese was the trigger. Not that there were individual orders for each and every crime.

    If anyone thinks Turse actually said all the individual acts of war crimes were only down to incident-specific orders they need their head examined. It was a manipulation of mindsets and strategic annihilation of the enemy. Through Agent Orange, napalm and B52 bombs ripping through the earth to the tunnels, the landscape and any poor soul on it was destroyed.

    I am reading a book called '13 Cent Killers' at the moment and the author is as supportive of the war as any I have read and his honesty about the bloodthirsty nature of some of his fellow soldiers tallies with much I have read on the subject.

    The Berkeley piece also tries to say that so many war crimes didn't happen as the military (investigating themselves) decided not to prosecute because of lack of evidence or because someone decided not to cooperate. Now where have I heard that before?

    In every war there are war crimes just as in peacetime there is always crime. The story of the Vietnam War is not an exception. There is no mitigation to war crimes. There may be an explanation but context doesn't change a war crime into something more benign. It's still a war crime.

    Dehumanising of the enemy happens in every war and Turse's explanation of how prevalent that was coupled with the scorched earth policy explains why in Vietnam they had their fair share of atrocities.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I think they were more concerned with him using quotes from people who had been debunked in the past. I was quite interested in reading the book until I noticed that he was using Mark Lane as a source.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/smearing.htm

    Of course the dehumanisation of the Vietnamese was rampant and it led to manys a murder. However, freely quoting people like Lane doesn't help.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Can you point to where he used Mark Lane as a source? There are dozens of pages of references and I am too lazy to sift through them. I like your adjective "freely" when describing how Turse quoted Lane. Paints a picture.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Simon,

    only picking up now on that BBC link you posted about the Veterans' kids. Emotional vignette of where the ripples of conflict can lead to and impact.

    Thanks,
    H.J.

    ReplyDelete
  32. HJ, Yes, devastating for so many. I wonder how the Vietnamese generally feel with children born with abnormalities from the effects of Agent Orange even today, and other ripples when the USA have made so much progress with the cultural war?

    ReplyDelete