<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Well-researched and well-argued.
Review: It is possible to see the beginning of a revisionist school of historical writing on Vietnam. Spector's AFTER TET, Burkitt's STOLEN VALOR, and now PHOENIX AND THE BIRDS OF PREY all represent a point of view that wants to remove the stigma of absolute failure from the U.S. military efforts in Vietnam. Moyar's book is more than a simple defense of the Phoenix/Phung Hoang program; it is a study of intelligence-gathering, pacification programs and their effectiveness against the NVA and the Viet Cong. Moyar concentrates on the post-Tet period which he argues saw increased American and South Vietnamese success in counterinsurgency. He collates interviews, translated captured documents, official statistics, and memoirs for his history and does a pretty fair job of evaluating the material. Moyar criticizes plenty of Americans and Vietnamese, and credits the NVA/VC for excellent motivation, organization and determination. Not all of his arguments are persuasive, but the breadth of his work must be considered by anyone who wants to challenge him. The response by an earlier "reviewer" at this site ("...CIA propaganda...") is enlightening. One of the moral bases of the 1960s political movements was opposition to the war in Vietnam. The antiwar movement cast the U.S. in a villainous role; My Lai, Cambodia, and inflated body counts made that pretty easy. Over the years, evidence of atrocities, the forced collectivization of agriculture in the reunited South Vietnam, corruption in the Communist Party leadership, and grudging admission by NVA leaders of high losses and military mistakes have made some question whether the war was such a stark "good guys v. bad guys" conflict. Of course, questioning the assumption that the U.S. was on the wrong side in Vietnam would seriously weaken the moral arguments of the antiwar leaders. Is the former South Vietnam better off once the U.S. left? If it is, why did so many leave after reunification, and why is the current Vietnamese leadership so eager to welcome American capitalists? On the other hand, if it was important that we took a stand in South Vietnam, why didn't the U.S. push the Diem and Thieu governments into real political and economic reforms? The real study of the Vietnam War can only begin when historians can set aside the need to prove a theory, and can look at what participants really did and why they thought they had to do it.
Rating: 
Summary: changing attitudes
Review: That is the title of chapter 25. Moyar tries to create the impression that loss of support for the viet cong ipso facto meant increased support for the government of South Vietnam by the peasants in the villages. I don't buy it. The peasants in many areas were fed up with the war and wanted little or nothing to do with either side. They would have been happy to have seen a coalition government that would have stopped the fighting. But the last thing in the world that Thieu would agree to was something like that. In many areas the armed viet forces on both sides reached accomodations. To some this might have looked like the Government of Vietnam was coming out on top but the people in the area knew otherwise. When Diem was in power he brought about much the same situation in the countryside where for several years he with seeming ease rounded up most of the communists, to the point where the Americans believed the communist problem was solved. But it wasn't.
Rating: 
Summary: A FASCINATING AND PIONEERING BOOK
Review: This book is an invaluable addition to the history of the Vietnam War. Containing much more information on Phoenix and the village war than any other book, it is also packed with new insights. Phoenix and the Birds of Prey brings the scholarship of the Vietnam War and guerrilla warfare to new levels.It's not hard to see why certain individuals are upset about this book. For years, opponents of the war-- to include much of the media-- have been telling us that the Phoenix Program was an important and cruel component of an immorally conducted war. Moyar's book demolishes their argument, showing that the reports of indiscriminate killing are grossly exaggerated. It's not one-sided, however: it details exploits of the Allied forces that are reprehensible, particularly involving the treatment of prisoners. It is testimony to the intransigence of some of the war's opponents that they are completely unwilling to consider that Moyar may be correct. Apparently anticipating the reaction he would encounter, Moyar loaded his book with a mountain of facts, derived from interviews, memoirs, books, U.S. government documents, and captured Communist documents. Many of the sources are quoted at length, allowing readers to be the judge. While any one source may have its uncertainties, it would be very difficult to look at the sum of all the facts presented by Moyar and not conclude that there is something to them. But the book does much more than just refute. It provides a remarkable look at all aspects of the American and South Vietnamese efforts to wrest control of the villages from the Viet Cong. Whether or not you're likely to agree with everything Moyar has to say, this book is worth reading if you have an interest in the Vietnam War or counter-guerrilla warfare. If the war's opponents have information that contradicts Moyar, where is it? They certainly haven't published it. Douglas Valentine's book on the subject doesn't come close. Even Morley Safer said Valentine's book was bad, in a review for the New York Times. All of Valentine's star witnesses are discredited in Phoenix and the Birds of Prey-- people like Mike Beamon, Elton Manzione, and Kenneth Barton Osborn, to name a few. These are the people the Left has used for years to build its case on Phoenix. Moyar also discredits journalists and historians like Neil Sheehan and Frances FitzGerald, who based their writings on a few days trips to secure provinces and chats at the bar of the Caravelle Hotel. Excellent foreword by Col. Harry Summers is an added bonus. It's good to see that some historians are finally challenging the dogmas of the "mainstream" and are doing so in a thorough manner. If it's true, as Moyar contends, that veterans of Phoenix and other Vietnam veterans were not "assassins" and "baby-killers," then the nation owes them an apology.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent; the truth
Review: This is the real truth about the Phoenix Program. The anti-war left has tried for years, with some success, to discredit it with disinformation. This is a well-written, accurate history of what really happened and is convincingly documented. And real -- I know, I was there (June 1968-June 1969)
Rating:
Summary: Excellent; the truth
Review: This is the real truth about the Phoenix Program. The anti-war left has tried for years, with some success, to discredit it with disinformation. This is a well-written, accurate history of what really happened and is convincingly documented. And real -- I know, I was there (June 1968-June 1969)
<< 1 >>
|
