Advertisement

Author Topic: Hmong History Since Entering SEAsia  (Read 11312 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SVanTha

  • Guest
Re: Hmong History Since Entering SEAsia
« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2013, 12:27:05 AM »
Quote
No, it wasn't. USA was already involved pre-1962. Like I stated earlier, USA supported the French re-colonization of Indochina as soon as the 1954 split of Vietnam at the 17th parallel. I know you're going to come up with some sensational bullshit excuse for this now too.

And like i said and will quote again, "All the political actions prior to the Geneva convention of 1962 was residual from the french and vietnamese war, NOT the american and vietnamese war."  That includes the americans, the french and your dog-eating regime.

The whole reason for the Geneva 'Agreement' of 1962 was to establish clear political status so all parties could stop acting with impunity.  All parties including americans, french and your dog-eating regime.  That is why your dog-eating regime went to Geneva, assembled, convened and agreed upon the Geneva 'Agreement' of 1962.  Are you denying that they put their signature on the Geneva 'Agreement' of 1962?  Are you denying that they agreed upon the political status of laos from 1962 onwards as a sovereign state, indepedent and neutral?

Quote
This all goes back to the fact that the "Secret War" was directly used to fight the Vietnamese forces, NOT to defend the land Hmong were living in. We numbered over 400,000 and yet, only 10,000-30,000 actually fought. Ok, so if we truly were fighting Vietnamese on our own homefront, Hmong soldiers would've been up in arms over 200,000 strong of teenage boys and men. Wonder what exaggerated excuse you'll have for this. "B-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but!"

Death figures from WWII, which was a much larger, much more important war:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Germany:
Population at WWII - 69,300,000
Military deaths - 4,400,000
percentage of population - 6.3%

USA:
Population at WWII - 131,028,000
Military deaths - 416,800
percentage of poppulation - 0.32%

Britain:
Population at WWII - 47,760,000
Military deaths - 383,800
percentage of poppulation - 0.8%

France:
Population at WWII - 41,700,000
Military deaths - 217,600
percentage of poppulation - 0.52%

Italy:
Population at WWII - 44,394,000
Military deaths - 301,400
percentage of poppulation - 0.68%

Soviet Union:
Population at WWII - 168,524,000
Military deaths - 14,000,000
percentage of poppulation - 8.3%

--------------------------------------------

Hmong (taking upper-end figures)
Population - 400,000
Military deaths - 30,000
percentage of poppulation - 7.5%

Sensational claim by dog-eating vietminh sympathizer and apologist:  check
Propaganda based on NO scientific metric to leverage the degree of a nation's 'defensive' posture:  check
Hilarious, amateurish and entertaining:  check

Quote
And so what? I'm not pro-Vietnam or pro-Laos. Stop explaining it to me as if I'm trying to justify or sugar coat Vietnam's continued installment of forces in Laos throughout the Indochina War. I said it myself: they broke the shit. I would've too to win the war. Would you? Oh, you would play fair? STFU. You think USA is playing it fair by the book in the Middle East? You're so out of touch with reality...

I'm fully 100% certain that a jury, given a transcript of this thread, would laugh at your claim of "I'm not pro-Vietnam".



Like this post: 0

Adverstisement

SVanTha

  • Guest
Re: Hmong History Since Entering SEAsia
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2013, 01:12:38 AM »
...Because you know you realize that I'm an actual educated and knowledgeable challenger to your garbage propaganda and now, you're trying to redeem yourself on this forum. Don't you go erasing that post where you called me names now.

You are really fun.  I am fully enjoying our conversation.  BTW, you can go back and see that i haven't edited/deleted a single one of my posts.  You however, have edited/deleted a total of 3 times so far...



Like this post: 0

HUNG TU LO

  • Guest
Re: Hmong History Since Entering SEAsia
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2013, 10:20:56 AM »
It's obvious you are a dog-eating communist vietminh sympathizer and apologist.  If anything is obvious in this thread, it's that.

Stating the history doesn't make one a supporter. That's the propaganda you've been led to believe. To you, any Hmong who isn't 100% in support of the Hmong-Laos-French cock riding, or provides the objective historical viewpoint, is a communist. I provide information or viewpoint that challenges your position and you respond by calling me names. This is the first sign that someone is a bigot; they believe only their views apply and you're either with them, or against them.

When someone pulls out the name-calling, that's a sign that they're intimidated.



Like this post: 0

night912

  • Guest
Re: Hmong History Since Entering SEAsia
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2013, 01:01:23 PM »
Stating the history doesn't make one a supporter. That's the propaganda you've been led to believe. To you, any Hmong who isn't 100% in support of the Hmong-Laos-French cock riding, or provides the objective historical viewpoint, is a communist. I provide information or viewpoint that challenges your position and you respond by calling me names. This is the first sign that someone is a bigot; they believe only their views apply and you're either with them, or against them.

When someone pulls out the name-calling, that's a sign that they're intimidated.

I agree. Stating the history doesn't make one a supporter.



Like this post: 0

SVanTha

  • Guest
Re: Hmong History Since Entering SEAsia
« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2013, 05:36:05 PM »
Stating the history doesn't make one a supporter. That's the propaganda you've been led to believe.

Completely agree.  What makes one a supporter is steadfast belief in a conclusion that has been proved unfounded.  The better example of propaganda is making statements without comprehensive evidence.

Quote
To you, any Hmong who isn't 100% in support of the Hmong-Laos-French cock riding, or provides the objective historical viewpoint, is a communist.

To me, an unsubstantiate d claim will be challenged.  If your claim stands up to the process of scrutiny in the face of hard evidence, I have no issue acknowledging the statement.

To you, when the evidence doesn't support your position, you still continue regardless and anyone in opposition is just, "in support of the Hmong-Laos-French cock riding"; case in point.

Quote
I provide information or viewpoint that challenges your position and you respond by calling me names.

You provided information and viewpoints that challenged my position and i countered every single one of them.

Ok, maybe you don't eat dog and maybe you may not be reading Ho Chi Minh's little red book every night, but 'comrade' originated from the french and how do you know french is not my native language and i'm just substituting it in?

Quote
This is the first sign that someone is a bigot; they believe only their views apply and you're either with them, or against them.

No, the first sign of a bigot is when they refuse to accept the conclusive evidence mounted against their views.

The evidence against my views have been, 1. proved false or, 2. there was no evidence but opinion, conjecture, irrelevence and even a case of pseudo-science dealing with how many participants in an armed resistance can be classified as 'defender' or 'attacker'...lol.

What are your reasons to hold on to your views?  were you able to disprove my evidence?  If so, which positions?  I may need to re-evaluate it if your evidence is credible.

Quote
When someone pulls out the name-calling, that's a sign that they're intimidated.

I have to admit, the dogged resistance of some people and their views in the face of conclusive evidence can be intimidating.



Like this post: 0

 

Advertisements