Gulf of Tonkin Incident, Conspiracy or Fog of War?

[Mark F]

On the afternoon (local time) of 2 August, 1964 the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Maddox was sailing in international waters when she was attacked by 3 North Vietnamese Navy P-4 or P-6 Motor Torpedo Boats. In the ensuing gun battle 2 of the North Vietnamese boats were sunk. The USS Maddox received light damage from several small caliber automatic gun rounds and suffered no casualties. Two days later on 4 August it is alleged the USS Maddox, now accompanied by the destroyer USS Turner Joy believed they were once again under attack by North Vietnamese MTB's and engaged in a 4-hour gun battle with suspected radar and sonar targets. These two incidents became known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident and became the impetus for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution which greatly deepened the American military effort in Vietnam. Only later was it revealed the second alleged attack of 4 August never in fact occurred, the official explanation being nervous sailors over-reacting to false contacts.

According to come Conspiracy Theorists including one participant here, audio recordings released decades after the event of a phone conversation between then-president Lyndon Johnson and then SecDef McNamara on 3 August at 10:30am (U.S. Eastern time) reveal the president falsified the alleged 2nd attack and in fact nothing happened that day.

Bman made such a claim here on 9/4/2014

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...idnt-inform-fbi-w-32-a-22.html#post1063724814

Ok, first one, gulf of Tonkin happened. Eventually the people involved came back saying that the second incident never happened. This became "rumours" that the incident never happened, then a conspiracy theory.

30 years or so later the tapes came out with the president ordering the fakery, conspiracy fact.

2 days later after being asked twice to back up the above claim Bman posted this:

Lmao. .. If you truly have the transcript and you still believe what you are saying then there's only a few options. Either you don't have the reading skills to understand what you are reading, or you are lying in one way or the other, or you are delusional and are blocked from accepting what you are reading.

I like watching you delude yourself so:

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/01 Track 1.wma

Basically he employs the standard lazy CT tactic of here is my vaguely defined claim, now watch this video/listen to this audio that doesn't say what I claim it says.

After asking Bman 6 times over 3 days to more clearly state his claim and the specific evidence supporting it and getting nothing but insults and evasions in return Bman finally posted this:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...idnt-inform-fbi-w-32-a-24.html#post1063728450

Then, I told you the generic process; the first gulf of Tonkin incident happened, then the second incident was used to start the war. When the troops came back they said there was no second incident, which because "rumours" that there was no second incident, and finally it became a conspiracy theory about the second incident.

NOW, some 30 years later the tapes were declassified proving that there was no second incident, that it was a fabrication for justification.

You asked for sources, which I provided, even though you claimed to have the transcript of the audio... And now you want to backpedal, but forgot how far you had to back pedal to get around the fact that you are, as usual, proven wrong.

The following post contains the complete transcript of the audio clip provided by Bman above in which Bman claims the POTUS orders the SecDef to falsify the 4 August incident with USS Maddox and USS Turner Joy.

 

[Mark F]

As promised above, here is the transcript of the audio Bman provided but refused to quote from to support his claim the 2nd incident not only never happened, but was fabricated by the POTUS to justify increasing U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

President Lyndon B. Johnson: Now I wonder if you don't think it'd be wise for you and Rusk to get Mac, uh, the Speaker and Mansfield to call a group of fifteen to twenty people together eh from the Armed Services and Foreign Relations to tell them what happened. A good many of them are saying to me
Secretary Robert McNamara: Right. I've been thinking about this myself, and I thought that uh
President Johnson: They're going to start an investigation
Secretary McNamara: Yeah.
President Johnson: if you don't.
Secretary McNamara: Yeah.
President Johnson: And you got Dirksen up there
Secretary McNamara: Yeah
President Johnson: and he's saying you've got to study it further, and say to Mansfield, "Now the President wants us, you, to get the proper people." And we come in and you say, "They fired at us. We responded immediately. And we took out one of their boats and put the other two running. And we kept our..., we're puttin' our boats right there, and we're not running on in."
Secretary McNamara: And it's hard to destroy.
President Johnson: That's right
Secretary McNamara: Right. And we're going to, and I think I should also, or we should also at that time, Mr. President, explain this Op Plan 34-A, these covert operations. There's no question but what that had bearing on. And on Friday night, as you probably know, we had four TP [McNamara means PT] boats from Vietnam manned by Vietnamese or other nationals, attack two is lands. And we expended, oh, a thousand rounds of ammunition of one kind or another against them. We probably shot up a radar station and a few other miscellaneous buildings. And following twenty-four hours after that, with this destroyer in that same area, undoubtedly led them to connect the two events.
President Johnson: Well say that to Dirksen.
Secretary McNamara: That's what I know he'll like.
President Johnson: You notice Dirksen says this morning, that "we got to reassess the situation, do something about it." I'd tell him that we're doing what he's talking about.
Secretary McNamara: Well, I, I was, I was thinking doing this myself in personal visits. But I think your thought is better. We'll get the group together. You want us to do it at the White House or would you rather do it at State or Defense?
President Johnson: I believe it'd be better to do it uh up on the Hill.
Secretary McNamara: All right.
President Johnson: I believe it'd be better if you say to Mansfield, "You call"
Secretary McNamara: Yup
President Johnson: Foreign Relations
Secretary McNamara: Yup, OK.
President Johnson: Armed Services
Secretary McNamara: OK. OK.
President Johnson: and and get Speaker to do it over on his side [i.e., within the House of Representatives, as opposed to the Senate].
Secretary McNamara: We'll do it
President Johnson: And just say it's very, I'd tell him awfully quiet, though, so they won't go in and be making a bunch of speeches. And tell Rusk that a, that's my idea.
Secretary McNamara: Great. .
President Johnson: And he's in New York, so I don't know whether's he's got back.
Secretary McNamara: Well I just talked to George Ball a few minutes ago, and I'll have George arrange it. Or at least I'll tell him that, and then I'll call the Speaker and Mansfield himself.
President Johnson: Now I wish that uh you'd give me some guidance on what we ought to say. I want to leave an impression on the background in the people we talk to over here that we're gonna be firm as hell without saying something that's dangerous. Now what do you think? Uh, uh, the people that are calling me up, I just talked to a New York banker, I just talked to a fellow in Texas, they all feel that the Navy responded wonderfully and that's good. But they want to be damned sure I don't pull 'em out and run, and they want to be damned sure that we're firm. That's what all the country wants because Goldwater's raising so much hell about how he's gonna blow 'em off the moon, and they say that we oughten to do anything that the national interest doesn't require. But we sure oughta always leave the impression that if you shoot at us, you're going to get hit.
Secretary McNamara: Well I think you would want to instruct George Reedy this morning at his news conference to say that you you personally have ordered the, the Navy to carry on the routine patrols uh off the coast of North Vietnam, uh to add an additional destroyer to the one that has been carrying on the patrols, to provide an air cap, and to issue instructions to the commanders to destroy any uh force that attacks our force in international waters.
President Johnson: [speaks over McNamara] Bob, if you don't mind,
Secretary McNamara: . . . I think that's the way...
President Johnson: If you don't mind, call Walter Jenkins and tell him
Secretary McNamara: Sure
President Johnson: that you want to dictate this to me
Secretary McNamara: I'll do it right now
President Johnson: to give to my people or George Reedy because I'm over at the Mansion with some folks here
Secretary McNamara: I'll do it right now.
President Johnson: OK. Right.

Perhaps Bman or someone else can point me to the exact bit of the conversation in which the POTUS instructs the SecDef to fake the 4 August incident.

I have to admit, I couldn't find it.

 

[Fearandloathing]

On the afternoon (local time) of 2 August, 1964 the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Maddox was sailing in international waters when she was attacked by 3 North Vietnamese Navy P-4 or P-6 Motor Torpedo Boats. In the ensuing gun battle 2 of the North Vietnamese boats were sunk. The USS Maddox received light damage from several small caliber automatic gun rounds and suffered no casualties. Two days later on 4 August it is alleged the USS Maddox, now accompanied by the destroyer USS Turner Joy believed they were once again under attack by North Vietnamese MTB's and engaged in a 4-hour gun battle with suspected radar and sonar targets. These two incidents became known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident and became the impetus for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution which greatly deepened the American military effort in Vietnam. Only later was it revealed the second alleged attack of 4 August never in fact occurred, the official explanation being nervous sailors over-reacting to false contacts.

According to come Conspiracy Theorists including one participant here, audio recordings released decades after the event of a phone conversation between then-president Lyndon Johnson and then SecDef McNamara on 3 August at 10:30am (U.S. Eastern time) reveal the president falsified the alleged 2nd attack and in fact nothing happened that day.

Bman made such a claim here on 9/4/2014

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...idnt-inform-fbi-w-32-a-22.html#post1063724814



2 days later after being asked twice to back up the above claim Bman posted this:



Basically he employs the standard lazy CT tactic of here is my vaguely defined claim, now watch this video/listen to this audio that doesn't say what I claim it says.

After asking Bman 6 times over 3 days to more clearly state his claim and the specific evidence supporting it and getting nothing but insults and evasions in return Bman finally posted this:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...idnt-inform-fbi-w-32-a-24.html#post1063728450



The following post contains the complete transcript of the audio clip provided by Bman above in which Bman claims the POTUS orders the SecDef to falsify the 4 August incident with USS Maddox and USS Turner Joy.

The "weapons of mass destruction" of its day.

 

[BmanMcfly]

How about you try this again without the lies?? Of course in typical fashion you will play dumb.

Further, try learning to read.

You don't need my help to figure this out, you just need to figure it out for yourself, it's not all that complicated.

Although, I'm shocked that you actually used the correct section of the clip.

 

[Mark F]

How about you try this again without the lies?? Of course in typical fashion you will play dumb.

Further, try learning to read.

You don't need my help to figure this out, you just need to figure it out for yourself, it's not all that complicated.

Although, I'm shocked that you actually used the correct section of the clip.

Again, if you are going to call me a lair you have the choice to specify exactly where I stated something I know to be untrue or to retract the accusation and apologize.

Or if you are going to continue with the childish schoolyard behavior instead of defending your ridiculous nonsense kindly go away. Or you can behave like an adult and defend your original claim from the links provided above by pointing out specifically the bit in the transcript of the audio you provided to support that claim that in fact actually supports your claim.

Either way,...

 

[APACHERAT]

The purpose of this thread ?

The first attack on the U.S. Navy happened and the second one didn't.

If JFK would have listened to his elders like President Eisenhower, there would have never been an American Vietnam War.

 

[Mark F]

The purpose of this thread ?

The first attack on the U.S. Navy happened and the second one didn't.

If JFK would have listened to his elders like President Eisenhower, there would have never been an American Vietnam War.

Agreed, the first attack of 2 August on USS Maddox did indeed happen - Vietnam readily admit it - while the second was the result of understandably hyper-alert U.S. sailors over-reacting to false targets. The claim being addressed however is that absolutely nothing happened in the 2nd incident on 4 August and in fact the President of the United States fabricated the entire 4 August incident as an excuse to go to war in Vietnam - or something along those lines anyway as the person who made the claim always leaves ample room for interpretation. Proof of this alleged fabrication is supposedly contained within the audio recording linked to in the OP with transcript of said recording provided in Post #2.

I have been unable to find the proof of this fabrication claim in either the audio recording or in the transcript.

 

[mike2810]

How about you try this again without the lies?? Of course in typical fashion you will play dumb.

Further, try learning to read.

You don't need my help to figure this out, you just need to figure it out for yourself, it's not all that complicated.

Although, I'm shocked that you actually used the correct section of the clip.

This is a typical repsonse from someone who can't/won't provide the data/information/quote of the cover up being ordered.

Bm, you could at least provide the quote or admit you have nothing.

 

[APACHERAT]

Agreed, the first attack of 2 August on USS Maddox did indeed happen - Vietnam readily admit it - while the second was the result of understandably hyper-alert U.S. sailors over-reacting to false targets. The claim being addressed however is that absolutely nothing happened in the 2nd incident on 4 August and in fact the President of the United States fabricated the entire 4 August incident as an excuse to go to war in Vietnam - or something along those lines anyway as the person who made the claim always leaves ample room for interpretation. Proof of this alleged fabrication is supposedly contained within the audio recording linked to in the OP with transcript of said recording provided in Post #2.

I have been unable to find the proof of this fabrication claim in either the audio recording or in the transcript.

Well there's already a active Vietnam War thread down in the Academia Forum and some of us can only refight the Vietnam War so often.
Right now consider me on R&R at China Beach. :lol:

 

[Mark F]

Well there's already a active Vietnam War thread down in the Academia Forum and some of us can only refight the Vietnam War so often.
Right now consider me on R&R at China Beach. :lol:

Ummm,... Dana Delany in her prime :mrgreen:

 

[APACHERAT]

Ummm,... Dana Delany in her prime :mrgreen:

View attachment 67172621

Officer were off limits for most of us. Nurses in the military are commissioned officers.

And the German nurses who were civilians would only associate with male officers.

I was only at China Beach for one day during my tour of duty.

But they did have the China Beach Surf Club. :lol:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Moderator's Warning:

Call out threads get closed.