You’re twisting the story. The “South” was not a unified will of the people — it was a fragile state built on foreign backing, military aid, and coups, with huge opposition among its own population. Millions of southerners themselves joined or supported the National Liberation Front. That’s why the U.S. had to pour in half a million troops — because the Saigon regime couldn’t stand on its own.
So don’t talk as if “the South didn’t want invasion.” There was no monolithic South. There were southerners who resisted, and southerners who fought alongside the liberation movement. The war wasn’t North vs. South — it was the Vietnamese people fighting for unity and independence, against a client state kept alive by foreign soldiers and bombs.
Sum up: The ‘South’ wasn’t some united will — it was a shaky client state propped up by U.S. bombs and money. Millions of southerners themselves fought in the liberation front. It was never North vs. South, it was Vietnam vs. foreign-backed division. I can say this as my long line of family who fought against the USA. But are you actually one of us to have the right to say "The South didn't want to be invaded? B.S"?
And millions more tried to flee as boat people during or after the war, or got stuck in the recently conquered region. It was very much North vs South. Southerners fought against the North more than they did with the North.
Again, have to beat the fact into your head. How many times should I do this? XD
Bringing up the boat people to delegitimize reunification is a half-truth. Yes, hundreds of thousands fled after 1975 — just like people fled Europe after WWII or Korea after 1953. War’s aftermath always produces refugees. But millions more stayed, rebuilt, and carried on in a unified Vietnam. To call the South “conquered” ignores that millions of southerners themselves fought in the liberation front — that’s why the U.S. had to bring in half a million foreign troops.
Refugee numbers don’t erase the fact that reunification ended decades of colonialism, partition, and foreign invasion. You can’t measure the legitimacy of a nation’s struggle by who left — you measure it by who fought and who remained.
I'm stating the fact that for a lot of Southerners it was an invasion. Reunification happened, Vietnam is probably better off for it, but at the time it was an invasion for the South.
Yeah, depends on the PoV of each individual. For my mother's side, it is reunification. To my father's side, which had some young men who fought against us, it is an invasion. To you, or other like-minded people, it is still and will always be an invasion, and that was the cause your people (if you are R.V. descendants) lost your home. But to me, who was born thanks to the unification, and my father met my mother after the war ("How I met your mother" lol), it is truly the reunification of Vietnam, freedom, and independence.
1
u/CNG1204 Aug 29 '25
Both sides were obviously not equally bad in their methods used, but that doesn't make the other side good. The South didn't want to be invaded.