As far as I know, I don't see any culture arguements from these people. So the credits go to these people. And here they are <<<drum playing...>>>

Indians
Thais
Philips
Malays
Indonesians


Who else? And the honorable prize goes to... VIETNAMESE! Yea!

this is rigged

Hahahahhahaha...

I think every culture tries to be as peaceful as they can be.

Not them

Darn it, I don't watch Star Trek.

Yowzers. Klingon pride!

peaceful? you mean the idle ones

I think I just swallow a cigarett. So very peaceful... , peace and harmony and I'm a satin.

Thay_

Hello peaceful white girl right here
Jenny

Phong,

You should learn to separate what the Viets did in Kampuchea in the 19th Century and now. It was a very different world then.

Furthermore, it's not a matter of Viet vs Khmer. We are all victims of the Cold War - a proxy conflict perpetrated by Washington, Moscow and Beijing.

You should tell that to the Vietnamese who still hold a grudge against Chinese today for our ancestors conquering Vietnam hundreds of years ago.

Vietnam's conflict with China stretches back several thousand years, not several hundred years. The reason for Vietnamese involvement in Kampuchea is precisely to prevent Chinese political and socio-economic influence from spreading in Southeast Asia. The Khmer Rouge was an ally of China.

What do you mean culture arguments? Arguments inside our culture?

The point is, you are suggesting Khmers to not hold a grudge against Vietnamese yet at the same time you are justifying Vietnamese holding a grudge against Chinese...

Hypocrite.

---

You don't see us holding a grudge against Mongolians or Manchurians for conquering us hundreds of years ago

---

Honestly, I can care less if ACVS hold a grudge against Chinese It's just your hypocricy that annoys me.

I don't know much about Khmer Krom, since I'm not one, but I think they are holding a grudge for what's happening right now, i.e. Vietnamese occupation of their ancestoral lands, demolishing temples, killing Khmer Krom leaders and Khmer Krom people etc. I do not think they are holding a grudge for what had happened in the 1950's, although those past events lead up to what's happening today.

Nice troll but it's not working, Kulong. I am too well versed in Chinese provocation techniques. So no crapola alert from you.

Since it seems tough for you to absorb the material here, let me explain it to you directly that I have been doing exactly just that. In case you don't notice, the forum has gone from ridiculeousness to a more tolerable level, people are willing to discuss serious issues and sniping and personal vendettas amongst posters have decreased somewhat.

Regarding your accusation, I don't see any parallel between Vietnamese relationship with China and Cambodia's relationship with Vietnam. The Cambodian conflict started out in the 1600's as an internal struggle with different Khmer royal factions seeking foreign powers to back them up for their quest for the throne. Centuries later, when the Vietnam war became a full-blown international contest between the superpowers, Cambodia got dragged into it through its own complicity (while insisting Cambodian neutrality, Sihanouk got paid by the North Vietnamese to open up the port of Kompong Cham to serve as a military supply depot funneling the Ho Chi Minh trail. The South Vietnamese raided Cambodia and the US bombed North Vietnamese military installation in Cambodia in retaliation).

The government of Vietnam treats all political opponents equally bad, Menikani.

What is, is that certain people have the power to determine what "ought" to be, based solely on their beliefs of what is "right". What is, is neither right nor wrong in the empiracle sense, it just is.

Some Vietnamese are working very hard to change things. www.fva.org. It's regrettable that both Cambodia and Vietnam started out on a bad foot.

LOL! I think so too!

Heheh...either you visited my page or you know me?? hehe...well, I don't want any war. I belief (excuse my spelling) that while war may gain lands but thousand of innocents are lay death. I don't speak for all the Khmer Krom but I speak for myself, I just want my people to have the same rights as your people.

We are human being, I do really belief in "We hold these truth to be self evidence, that all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness..."

I just want that....freedom....no war. For those who said that while the Khmer people speak for peace and a moment later of war. I disagree with that statement, war is the last resort when peace could not be achieved.

I agree that we're the victim of war but for the Vietnamese government to treat the Khmer Krom people inhumanely, sacrifice of live need to be shed or else freedom will never come.

Yes, we do have a common enemy, that is the Vietcong. I would fought against the Vietcong for if you offer equality to my people.

Peace or War, pick one.
Thay_ or Phong if you prefer.

most of vietnamese or chinese any way event thought my family is from vietnam as long as i know but our last name Vo come from china for sure. :genius:

You mean this?

Pol Pot timebomb set on a 'Decent Interval'

In his latest edition of the untold story of the KR's rise to power, Italian journalist Giorgio Fabretti argues that Pol Pot was placed in power by cold warriors who knew he would be toppled by the Vietnamese after a "Decent Interval". He says Pol Pot knew this as well.

Wars are like pieces of art.

Usually commanded by economic-military interests, wars are styled or framed by politicians.

The Cold War was an ideological style to stage or frame post-World War II conflicts, which faded after the Berlin Wall fell.

The positive aim of the Cold War was to avoid a World War III, through a tense sharing of world influence among two supposedly balanced ideological systems, in fact a stronger one (US-backed) and a weaker one (USSR-backed).

The current misunderstanding of the general public about the Cold War comes from the fact that the Cold War was staged as a "race" among two superpowers (for propaganda reasons), while in fact it was a more sophisticated policy of "balance".

No leaders were naïve in the Cold War. All, winners and losers, had their role and share of power. The intertwined Cold War system even preserved Pol Pot - a mere puppet controlled by superpower masters - after 1979. The only real losers were the victims needed for the realism of the staged drama.

The rules of the Cold War were mainly three.

1) To play the role of a fighter, an enemy was needed first. "Enemy building", was the highest and most secret level of decision during the Cold War. Causing wars could be part of this level.

2) The second rule was: the enemy must be kept weak and divided. This was a subordinated level, and the one that has been uncovered in bits and pieces afterwards. This rule was most effectively employed by the US.

3) The third rule: the enemy must be made to look evil, and its aggressiveness must be encouraged to show false weaknesses. This level was explored after the first and second level, and kept secret accordingly.

The Cold War was played as a stage run by the winners of World War II: the Americans and their minor, the Russians. Pol Pot and Cambodia were given a small, yet tragic role in the script.

Although he would not appear on stage for several more years, Pol Pot was invited to the theater before 1972 as China received its reward for supporting Hanoi in the Vietnam War. His role was carefully scripted into the performance by the Chinese, Vietnamese, Americans and Soviets to maintain the Cold War's precarious balance of power.

Cold War techniques were first set up by the British Empire, which tested them successfully many times, especially during World War I. But at last, Winston Churchill played too hard in World War II against his German rival. Nazis were first helped with Britain's "appeasement" policies, and then destroyed in the second half of World War II.

Churchill won his war, but it was so "hot", expensive and tragic that he was forced into political bankruptcy and replaced by the more sophisticated, hypocritical, cheaper and stable Cold War. The Yalta Agreements signaled the end of Churchill and the rise of the USA.

The only possible enemy of the USA in the Cold War was the Soviets, otherwise part of and a natural ally of the West. The Russians had been the decisive factor in defeating the Germans. Nevertheless, US President Harry Truman and Senator Joseph McCarthy went to work to transform the Russian Dr Jeckel into the evil Stalinist Soviet Mr Hyde. Atomic secrets were soon leaked to the inferior Red Bear to stage the needed balance of superpowers.

On their way to building up the Cold War, the Americans met, in the powerful Soviet Interior Minister Lavrenti Beria, an unwanted ally, who tried to set up a pro-US, Jewish-backed coup in Moscow. Perhaps similar to the final demise of Pol Pot, Beria possibly had the hesitant Stalin killed by a Jewish doctor. But, just in time, some Western contacts of Beria leaked the coup plan to his rival Nikita Krutschev, who was able to kill Beria, force the Russian Jews into the new US-sponsored Israel and made the Soviet Bear more aggressive. The Chinese were not yet in the game, but Mao dutifully understood the lesson.

The Red Bear had then to be fed with juicy bleeding prey. Korea was the first one. Vietnam then followed. The French had been used first, until De Gaulle refused. Then the US had to do the work themselves after the fall of Dien Bien Phu in 1954: it was the weakest point of the Cold War and the beginning of its dismissal. US President John Kennedy, and many other victims (56,000 plus) were sacrificed to feed the Bear, wage a war and show how dangerous the Soviets were.

Ho Chi Minh, the timely victim, paid the highest tribute of blood to the Cold War, and demanded national unity and influence over Laos and Cambodia in return.

US President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev couldn't refuse to stop the Vietnam War because of financial and democratic problems at home.

US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had to throw a spotlight on the Cold War backstage, to send the peace signal. For a short lapse of time, Kissinger had shown the secret scenery of the Cold War. But international opinion was readily diverted by nicknaming Kissinger a "diplomatic genius", and awarding him a Nobel Peace Prize.

Kissinger and Soviet Premier Andrei Gromyko indeed had only stuck to the unwritten rules of the Cold War, and possibly exposed their secrets, in what a CIA analyst called the Decent Interval Agreement on Vietnam. He was not allowed to use the plural needed for a more realistic definition: "Decent Intervals".

To save the face of America, Vietnam had to wait a First Decent Interval (two years of waiting, plus one on the offensive), after the 1972 final Paris agreements, to eventually conquer South Vietnam (only "2.4" years later, on April 30, 1975).

In fact the Decent Intervals implicitly imposed by Kissinger were "double". Vietnam should have waited three more years (two plus one) for its second reward - influence over Cambodia - eventually implemented in December 1978. Hanoi had initially planned to establish a puppet government in Cambodia before 1978. But after the Christmas 1977 offensive and attempted coup d'état against Pol Pot, which quickened the Khmer Rouge eastern purges, the takeover was postponed until the end of 1978.

The Vietnamese had long since learned, at their own expense, how the reins of the Cold War were not in their hands, and not even in the hands of their Soviet sponsors. Their ruling class kept cool and finally won Cambodia.

Indeed Nixon and Brezhnev had decided during secret negotiations from 1968-72 (a minor southeastern "Yalta") that China deserved a slice of the Indochinese cake, specifically Cambodia, in the ancient outdated logic of the vassal state. But the Americans and the Soviets served the cake properly poisoned, since neither superpower wanted China to swallow Cambodia forever. The stage for the Cambodian holocaust was thus set in 1972: the following events were mostly "automatic" and "technical".

At the same time both superpowers wanted to please China, which was awakening from the long and comfortable (for the Cold War protagonists) Mao isolationist sleep. Mao and Chou En Lai, as a reward for their support to North Vietnam, were given Pol Pot and his small Stalinist party, until then under strict Vietnamese control.

To offer the poisoned gift, Nixon went in 1972 all the way to China for the first time to cash in on Mao's appreciation and set up an opportunistic and shaky alliance. Nixon and Kissinger, the Cat and the Fox of the well known tale, cheated the Chinese Panda in many ways at one time.

After the Judas/Nixon kiss, China had to fight the Vietnamese directly, partly by using the new vassal state of Cambodia.

According to the set rules of the Cold War, Nixon had played a masterly "sting" at the expense of his largest and dullest enemy: China (which accepted to play the "paper tiger" in exchange for some capitalism, to break the Maoist deadlock). Behind token protests, the US maneuvering had been approved by Moscow.

With the Cambodian move, Kissinger sold a second-hand broken and brakeless "bus" (Cambodia), to the most inexperienced transport company (China), which hired the only suicidal driver on the market (Pol Pot) willing to drive such a vehicle. Aside from winning his amazing bet, Kissinger gained a new enmity (Cambodia) against his Soviet and Viet enemies.

Moscow and Hanoi accepted the Cold War 1972 deal because they badly needed the North Vietnamese victory. Moreover they had to stage a goodwill move toward the allied China.

So Russia and Vietnam accepted to wait for a Second Decent Interval to extend their influence over Cambodia. But right after 1972, the US, USSR and Vietnam began to plot, to fulfill the secret prophecy of absolute disaster that occurred in war-torn Cambodia at the hands of its small Hitler.

After the Viets accepted Pol Pot's killing of Hanoi-trained Khmer communists, Kissinger added his helping hand by bombing Cambodia. All was done to help Pol Pot rise in power as a time bomb with a fuse set on a Decent Interval.

China and Pol Pot in 1975, showing pride for one of the few imperialist victories of the ragamuffin Maoist Communism, did not hesitate to seal war-torn Cambodia in an inefficient, self-reliant and suicidal hostility against the Vietnamese, which in previous times had completely infiltrated Cambodia.

After 1972, Pol Pot and his comrades were controlled at large by Hanoi. Several coups were staged and dismantled to keep Pol Pot under pressure.

The Khmer Rouge and China (with 16,000 advisers in Cambodia during 1975-79) tried to keep their disaster secret. At the same time some top KR leaders (Pol Pot, the Thiounn brothers, Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary, Son Sen, etc) indirectly cooperated with Vietnam to leave space for the coming Viet takeover.

The brakeless, Pol Pot-driven "bus" crashed timely in 1977, in total political and military failure, amidst staged celebrations of Pol Pot in Peking.

Nevertheless the Vietnamese were not yet allowed to swallow their predestined prey. Due to inefficiency, Pol Pot's retreat from power had to be delayed. Pol Pot - a guerrilla leader rather than a statesman - who had perfect knowledge of his disaster, notwithstanding the technical and political efforts staged, wanted a further delay for his "defeat" to secure his movement's future as a diehard nationalistic opposition.

Most naive moderate Khmer Rouge had to be purged by Pol Pot. Rice had to be stolen from the mouths of starving Khmers, to be stored along the path of the imminent retreat. Moreover, Pol Pot had to shift his contract from the current Chinese sponsor to the future Sino-Thai joint venture.

Of all in the Pol Pot tragedy, the Americans were the lightest loser. After having paid their tribute of money and blood to the Cold War in Vietnam, the US allowed itself in the tragic Cambodian chapter to be the ironical audience of a puppet theater, at a token cost, with no direct involvement. The puppet strings of Pol Pot, were pulled by a Chinese master, who unwillingly was acting out a Soviet/Viet tale. A great diplomatic success of US President Jimmy Carter and his National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinsky.

Cambodian and Vietnamese soldiers and citizens paid the highest tribute in blood. Mao's China had stamped its official approval on the most "impotent" national policy of the century; but in fact Mao's commitment to Pol Pot was later to be continued as a realpolitik transaction in order to buy the long-waited admission to wear the New Market Capitalism Texas Ranch Rodeo Cowboy Hat (finally worn by Deng Xiaoping in the US).

At the same time Moscow, by maneuvering its Viet footman, appeared once more as the evil mastermind of the Communist Bloc and of the Cold War.

But thanks to the Cambodian sacrifice, the 1980s saw a growing difficulty to save the Cold War from final collapse.

Today in 1998 the Cold War is long since finished.

Time has come to drop the tale of the evil communist ideology, in exchange for a more balanced version that, by the way, will save the victims of Cold War leftovers in North Korea.

Bureaucratic (real) communism, far from being inspired by an idealistic philosophy, has always been an authoritarian and inefficient administrative system, well known and manipulated by its external enemies until it collapses notwithstanding all the efforts to support its survival.

Inefficiency and collapse were as well the foreseeable destiny of Pol Pot, kept secret and made a "mystery".

The new era of Human Rights Defense is well under way. The enemy is not Red anymore, but is the corrupted/extreme nationalism and/or integralism, anywhere in the world, with its terrorist side dishes. Substantial diplomatic action continues to be advanced according to the Cold War line - no longer behind an ideological screen, but behind a Human Rights/Politically Correct one.

Local atomic bombs are ready to be launched in the next century of egotistic folly, where the newly wealthy national states lose touch with reality and pull the trigger (as it happened to the Europeans in the first half of 20th century).

After several other Decent Intervals, Vietnam has partially established long-term influence over Cambodia. In the meantime, the Chinese ruling class is supporting itself by nourishing its nationalism with an ephemeral economic boom, and heading straight to its next painful "loss of face".

The Soviet Enemy was eliminated for its ultimate loss of credibility. Now strategic Russia depends on US tactical support, as in World War II before counter-attacking Germany.

All major powers involved in the sad chapter of Pol Pot have renewed their political personnel and should now, more than 20 years later, be ready to open their archives (in Moscow, Beijing, Washington, Hanoi, Phnom Penh, Bangkok, etc); at least to purify their consciousness.

Kiernan, Chandler, Chanda, Ponchaud, Locard, Vickery, Quinn, etc: none of the scholars who studied Pol Pot has yet written a detailed chapter about the secret agreements during the Vietnam War that in 1972 guided the "Stalinist" Pol Pot into an instant opportunistic pro-Chinese "Maoism".

Pol Pot was compelled to sign a ferocious, anti-Vietnamese, "Faustian pact" with China, amazingly without any reaction of the armed Vietnamese who then controlled the Khmer guerrilla leader.

Pol Pot had been a hostage, threatened with Mafia-style execution since 1972 and before, afterwards acting consistently to save his own life.

Other new historical chapters have to be compiled on how Hanoi, Moscow and Washington accepted, controlled and prepared themselves to the "Rise and Fall of Pol Pot".

For sure the Cambodian tragedy needs a new historical approach within the frame of the tactics and strategies of the Cold War, whose legacy seems now, more than 20 years later, ripe for a revisited and neutral analysis.

A tribunal on the so-called "genocide" cannot properly judge the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot without first dismissing the Cold War lies and "face values" that brought them to power.

Source:
http://www.phnompenhpost.com/TXT/comments/polpot2.htm

Pi is always at war with the cambolian

So, Thay you're a female? Hmm.....I always thought you were male... Anyway, it's all good. Actually, it very nice to have Khmer female who is very passionate about the cause of Khmers in Cambodia and Kampuchea Krom b/c it seems that not too many female Khmers are interested in the plight of our people and country.

It's the other way around... and it's with only a few khmer memebers and the many personalities of bjay-1