Talk:Viet Cong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Social theorist (talk | contribs) at 09:42, 23 February 2006 (→‎Were non-Communists in the NLF?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This article has been split from the article Viet Cong for reasons discussed at Talk:Viet Cong. --Michael Snow 21:35, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

the US-backed Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam War - weren't they also fighting the French before DienBien Phu? RickK 00:18, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. That was the Viet Minh, a different organization. john 00:23, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. RickK 02:19, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Now is it National Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam as in the text, or National Front for the Liberation of Vietnam, as in the title? Currently this article and Viet Cong partly duplicate each other, which should be handled. Get-back-world-respect 16:19, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I can't give you a definitive answer, since I can't translate the Vietnamese, but I highly doubt the word "South" is in the name of the organization, since the NLF and People's Republic didn't rhetorically acknowledge a separate country of "South Vietnam." -- Cecropia | Talk 16:39, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

separate entries?

according to who? and who benefits from the redundancy? Sam [Spade] 04:01, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

After lengthy discussions, the community consensus was that the NLF article should deal with the organization, as the organization referred to itself as the NLF (and never as the "Viet Cong," which was a pejorative term), while the VC article deal with the origins and use of the term "VC" among the South Vietnamese and Americans. 172 04:09, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

really, 'cuz i see a lot of duplicate info in these articles. personally, i think it should redirect. and "Viet Cong" isn't perjorative any moreso than "Khmer Rouge" is instead of "Communist Party of Cambodia" J. Parker Stone 22:45, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
ah, ok. Sam [Spade] 04:25, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The title should be "National Front for the Liberation of Southern Vietnam" as translated word by word from "Mặt Trận Giải Phóng Miền Nam Việt Nam".


Me, A Kid's Understanding

Sorry for being lousy, but I am only thirteen. Is it that... Viet Minh got rid of the French, and the Viet Cong took this advantage to form an EVIL EVIL communist party? Ho Chi Minh is old evil man with long white beard! VC very evil... or as people call them "gooks". I am sure that someone out there would not delete me out... this is a discussion, right?

Here's a tip. Read some more and draw out a little chart then ask more specific questions. --Gbleem 15:20, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Charlie

Did Charlie exist as a racial slur before the vietnam war? --Gbleem 15:18, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


American Public "Scared"

I removed the following

...the Viet Cong played a highly successful role in scaring the American public away from the war in Vietnam.

There are several things wrong with this statement, especially the way it was situated in the paragraph. It seemed to imply that it was a public relations coup, but it was simply the nature of the war that made people dislike the war. Of course the Viet Cong was involved in most of the fighting so in a trivial sense they were responsible for the nature of the war. But saying the American public was "scared" away by there tactics is highly speculative about the very complex feelings people had about the war--fear is a oversimplification at best, inaccurate at worst.--Brentt 02:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why at NLF and not VC?

NLF is an incorrect translation from Vietnamese (it's advocating the liberation of "Southern Vietnam", not "Vietnam"), and is not as well-known as Viet Cong in English. According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), it should be in Viet Cong. If you're interested, please also see the suggested move at Talk:Hanoi Hilton DHN 09:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But see from that article:

Also, some terms are in common usage but are commonly regarded as offensive to large groups of people (Mormon Church, for example). In those cases use widely known alternatives (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

My impression is that Viet Cong is considered offensive by the Vietnamese. Is this not true? Nareek 13:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Were non-Communists in the NLF?

The article says that "all VC members were Communists." Assuming that the meaning of VC in this sentence is synonomous with the NLF, I find that hard to believe. The NLF might have been overwhelmingly Communist, but it's hard to imagine that out of the thousands upon thousands of peasants who supported the VC, not even one of them was a non-Communist. I'm willing to bet that at least one or two Buhddists supported the NLF just to get back at Diem --Descendall 04:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Yes, they were

The standard historical stance on the NLF is that they were made up of various groups, including remnants of the Cao Dai, Hoa Hao, Binh Xuyen, various Buddhist groups and others who were unhappy with the Diem regime. It seems to me that this article is quite slanted toward the notion that the NLF were only communists and elides what is considered their central raison d'etre: the overthrow of Diem. I would like to see from whence the grounds for this assumption come. --Social theorist 09:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Viet_Cong&oldid=40839756"