the sad song april 30

the sad song for april 30 today
what south Vietnam? by n.t
we remember the forgotten "south nam"
it battled communists for 18 years
then the north violated the treaty
besieging saigon with war, death and tears.

the defeat of the south was tragic
communists conqird and erased it
no mention of south nam anymore
so we feel sad and must mention it.
hmm.
details: this date april 30 marks the sad success of the communists from north vietnam who violated the  treaty and invaded the forgotten country once called ROV or south vietnam.  after a long war the sides finally made a peace treaty, kuz north vietnam sufferd great losses and decided to stop its aggression... just long enuf for u.s to leave... hahaha. then they attacked the separate and now forgotten south vietnam whose border had been the latitude line called  17 degrees. evil commies conquerd the land including the capitol city saigon that surrenderd today in 1975 around 18 years after the war started.  d
the sadness is more intense kuz the invaders annuld the citizens options to choose a leader from at least two options. enforcing the "single party" political system only communist but no other option to choose. in contrast to america we have two major choices and even  some smaller ones for people who want other options and dont mind that their vote wont lead to a president.
those sadnesses combined, multiply the sadness of this date april 30.
also relevant to that war is to consider the tragic response of then democrat president Johnson in general and in sending spy ships and then over-reacting when his ships got shot at along the coast of north Vietnam.
the u.s troubles in vietnam started with the democrat president,  we will compare the wars of republican presidents but first focus on nam.  m
from year 1957, the u.s sent military advisors to help south vietnam: the country freed from french imperialism and divided at latitude 17 degrees north from the imaginary equator called 17 parallel.
for many years u.s helpd with advisors. even kennedy the democrat did not send troops there.
but after assassins kild jfk then johnson became president, who approved sending ships to spy at north vietnam along its coast, which was risky... i think stupid and a republican wouldnt have sent a ship near the north vietnam coast... even kennedy hadnt. t
then when the commies shot at the boat the dem reaction was to escalate the violence air-bombing the north and from then the u.s had problems in vietnam. the people voted johnson out but what could the republican do? they would lose everything that they had workd for. as hilary clinton-d wrote to me about afghanistan that is a valid reason to continue but still things probably wouldnt have gotten to that point if the president was not lbj. but the dem causd the problem.
compare lincoln war... republican for idea... for the unity of u.s kuz separating, also to fiit bad slavery. y that is idealistic
compare fdr elected in 1940 after keeping america away from europe problems. he saw nazi bullying austria in 1938 and chek in 1939 spring. he kept america separate from those problems and was re-elected by voters for that reason... to continue separation, until FORCED TO respond toward japan as an exception kuz japan atakd just "an exception" must fiit japan... but continue policy for separate europe kuz the reason for which the people voted for him. coulda sent all resources to pacific... but the dem jerk scatterd the soldiers in many deadly battles africa and Italy and more but worse than the weakening of scattering force, and most importantly changing response to nazis in "conflict with the voters" as above.  they wanted Europe separate...  a "straight" person woulda responded only to japan as an exception and used all resources except a bit gaurding east coast, imagine how many more jap ships coulda sank quickly, n isolating jap isles if the navy woulda all went west... the vast pacific needed many... but stupid dem violated voters mission and weakend the response to japan. by scattering warships and soldiers in other places. by scattering small groups of warships and soldiers in other places.
even the fake  propaganda "we need to fiit bad hitler" yet that was against the previous responses and made the pacific response weaker. the democrats have always ruind wars. what if a republican was president? he might have had a different policy on japan and spotted the planes in time... saving lives in pearl harbor and only sending soldiers and navy to pacific none woulda died in africa and europe as bad democrat causd hence shortening the jap war woulda ended sooner too with less life kild causd japan would need to face so much at the same time. stupid democrat causd jap war to drag for almost four years simply by violating the mission of the voters who re-elected him for the reason not send troops to europe what a shmo. dont you see how harmful democrat policy has always been?  n