Read the Beforeitsnews.com story here. Advertise at Before It's News here.
Profile image
By John Rolls (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views
Now:
Last hour:
Last 24 hours:
Total:

Bombshell: Former CIA Officer Kevin Shipp Goes Public, Exposing Deep State Coup Against America (and Naming Names) +Video

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.


By:   /  Natural News

Greg Hunter of USAwatchdog.com has just released a bombshell interview with former CIA officer Kevin Shipp, who details the deep state coup that’s under way right now to overthrow America and destroy the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

This is, without question, Hunter’s most important interview so far this year, and you absolutely need to listen to this interview and learn how “dark” actors are conspiring to overthrow the United States Government. In this interview, you’ll learn how James Comey has been a “lifelong fixer” for Hillary Clinton, and his own involvement in criminal drug cartel money laundering banks was covered up by none other than Robert Mueller.

They’re all part of a criminal “mafioso” gang: James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Robert Mueller, James Clapper, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Brennan, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and many more. These people are criminal traitors of Americaand pose a “clear and present” danger to the sustainability of our constitutional republic. (Read DeepState.news for more coverage of the treason carried out by these “black hat” deep state actors.)

White Hat Deep State Patriots go to battle with forces of darkness and deception

Kevin Shipp, a former CIA officer, is the author of From the Company of Shadows, and you can check out his website at ForTheLoveOfFreedom.net. He’s also a member of the Joint Task Force to Make America Great Again (JTFMAGA.com), which describes itself as a group of “white hat deep state patriots.”

As All News Pipeline relates:

We will close with this extremely important excerpt from Greg Hunter’s USA Watchdog and his recent interview with former CIA officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp which sums up everything that we’ve been witnessing ever since President Trump was elected and explaining exactly why America is still in such danger as a ‘Constitutional crisis’ the likes we’ve never seen in America continues to unfold in the days and weeks ahead. You can the entire interview embedded as the final video below.

Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says what is going on with Donald J. Trump “is an ongoing coup to remove a duly elected President.” Shipp contends, “This is a huge constitutional crisis like the country has never seen before. This makes Watergate look like a Sunday school class.”

On Friday, Shipp and other retired top officials at the CIA, FBI, DOJ and NSA held a press conference and demanded Attorney General Jeff Sessions prosecute top Obama era officials for obvious crimes against the incoming Trump Administration. Shipp says, “We have a coup within our government right now at the senior levels at the CIA, DOJ and the FBI attempting to unseat a duly elected President who was elected by the American people and remove him from office. . . .This is, at worst, treason with senior officials in the shadow government or Deep State . . . to attack Donald Trump and remove him from office.”

Shipp goes on to explain, “There is essentially a civil war involving parts of senior management and upper parts of our government that is occurring in the United States. It’s between the ‘Dark’ side and the ‘Constitutional’ side. There has never been anything like this in history. It is extremely serious, and this is an extremely serious hour for our government and especially for our constitutional freedoms. . . . This essentially is a global criminal cabal that has penetrated into our government and now has senior level officials colluding and, I would argue, conspiring to unseat this president.”

In closing, Shipp says, “People need to understand that the Democrat Party today is not the Democrat Party of John F. Kennedy. The Democrat Party with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is more Marxist than anything else. They think the Constitution should be a ‘progressive’ document. In other words, the Constitution is outdated and should be redone. They are both directly connected into George Soros, who wants to destroy the sovereignty of the U.S. government. . . . The Democrat Party is now made up of Marxists and leftists that have penetrated that entire organization. . . . Their entire goal is to change our form of government and destroy our sovereignty.”

NOTE: YouTube will sooner or later censor this video and all other videos that expose the traitorous deep state. On July 4th, I’m launching REAL.video, a YouTube alternative that protects the free speech of pro-liberty, pro-freedom voices. Spread the word: Every journalist, blogger and whistleblower in America needs to go to REAL.video right now and request a content channel. Toward the last half of June, accounts will be activated and you can begin uploading videos which will go live on July 4th.

Here’s an update on REAL.video that explains more:

https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-04-29-former-cia-officer-kevin-shipp-goes-public-exposing-deep-state-coup.html

More great articles here: https://www.naturalnews.com

 

 

 

 



Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world.

Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.

"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.

Please Help Support BeforeitsNews by trying our Natural Health Products below!


Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://mitocopper.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST

Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomic.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST

Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomics.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST


Humic & Fulvic Trace Minerals Complex - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!

HNEX HydroNano EXtracellular Water - Improve immune system health and reduce inflammation.

Ultimate Clinical Potency Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.

MitoCopper - Bioavailable Copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy. (See Blood Video)

Oxy Powder - Natural Colon Cleanser!  Cleans out toxic buildup with oxygen!

Nascent Iodine - Promotes detoxification, mental focus and thyroid health.

Smart Meter Cover -  Reduces Smart Meter radiation by 96%! (See Video).

Report abuse

    Comments

    Your Comments
    Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

    Total 10 comments
    • Anonymous

      A new platform for propoganda. Gee, that’s nice. :smile:

    • Idiot Proof

      What happened to my comment on, these two, both referring to that fraudulent thing in the District of Criminals, as our, “government”, which, it is not, within the first two minutes of the video? I thought it was a big enough deal, on which, to post a comment, mainly, because…I DIDNT WATCH ONE MORE SECOND OF THE AFFORE MENTIONED VIDEO!
      So why was my comment removed?
      As long as I have been in search of the absolute undulated truth, which, should set me, and, everyone else free, one of the very first, foremost, and, important pieces of information, which really begin to clear up some of the confusion, that runs miles deep into, along, and surrounding the state of our society, today, is, the FACT, that the corporation in DC, is not our, anybody’s, or even ‘a’ government, in any way shape or form. Putting an absolute ending to calling the corporation used to enslave us, “our”, or, “the” government, and, the People subsequently not looking at, or considering it, as a government, would promise to help us terminate it’s very existence. So, I think, it is a very big thing, when people such as the two in the video, keep supporting and perpetuating old invalid illegitimate and incorrect perceptions, held, by the general public.

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      /international/2018/04/president-donald-john-trump-a-non-attorney-rah-rah-2497018.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrMnkbkzvik

      Fw: John Clark
      Saturday, December 27, 2014 3:33 PM
      From:
      “MLG”
      To:
      [email protected]
      Cc:
      [email protected]
      Bcc:
      [email protected]
      Raw Message Printable View
      6 Files7 MBDownload All
      JPG178KBSaveJPG1 MBSaveJPG1 MBSaveJPG1 MBSaveJPG1 MBSaveJPG1 MBSave

      mlcg
      [email protected], and [email protected]
      LockBox 27,
      Point Lookout, Missouri 65726
      1 866 523 2993
      480 778 0459
      Fax 206 337 1900
      Yahoo messenger ml.gentry
      wealthforall2 Skype ID
      This private communication is not to be forwarded,
      copied,
      distributed,
      published.

      — On Sat, 10/25/08, Kathy Bilbrey wrote:

      > From: Kathy Bilbrey
      > Subject: John Clark
      > To: [email protected]
      > Date: Saturday, October 25, 2008, 7:36 PM
      > Hi here are the Pics I took
      > at the National Cemetery in Nashville .
      >
      >
      > Kathy
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vST6hVRj2A

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      Related Stories
      Authentic Love versus Fake Love
      1944::: 18-Year-Olds storm the beach at Normandy, into almost certain death. 2018::: 18-Year-Olds need a safe place because words hurt their feelings.
      Musical Mysteries! and Five G network… StopTheCrimes!
      Image day Russia… (April 29th, 2018)
      the marriage of our legal system with democracy is a virtuous notion; the marriage between a former Supreme Court Chief Justice and a Branson City attorney have successfully annulled the notion of unadulterated matrimony
      International Political Prisoner #04414-048 Michael-Howard-Reed FCI Safford P.O. BOX 9000 SAFFORD, AZ 85548 the marriage of our legal system with democracy is a virtuous notion; the marriage between a former Supreme Court Chief Justice and a Branson City attorney have successfully annulled the notion of unadulterated matrimony
      International Political Prisoner #04414-048 Michael-Howard-Reed FCI Safford P.O. BOX 9000 SAFFORD, AZ 85548 the marriage of our legal system with democracy is a virtuous notion; the marriage between a former Supreme Court Chief Justice and a Branson City attorney have successfully annulled the notion of unadulterated matrimony
      International Political Prisoner #04414-048 Michael-Howard-Reed FCI Safford P.O. BOX 9000 SAFFORD, AZ 85548 the marriage of our legal system with democracy is a virtuous notion; the marriage between a former Supreme Court Chief Justice and a Branson City attorney have successfully annulled the notion of unadulterated matrimony
      8669 Historic Hwy 165 , Hollister, Missouri = LEO files of visits to that address,POST OFFICE COMPLAINTS, OIG COMPLAINTS = Toxic Black Mold,Meth Manufacturing,or both, private security, military intelligence
      No Trespass Notice: Taney County, Land of Taney, Arkansas Missouri Territory Turtleisland

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      —- Original Message —–
      From: onwingsofeaglestrust © ™ ®
      To: Michael-Philip: Rothermel
      Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 3:15 PM
      Subject: what did you do with Gabrielle’s cell phone telephone numbers “Michael-Philip: Rothermel”

      what did you do with Gabrielle’s https://gabriellegodling.wordpress.com/
      cell phone telephone numbers “Michael-Philip: Rothermel”

      Beverly Jane Clarkson Jeffery

      please reply: POST OFFICE
      TWENTY SEVEN,POINT LOOKOUT, MISSOURI
      65672
      CELL: 780 280 8365

      http://geminiinvestmentsresearchgroup.wordpress.com/forms

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      —- Original Message —–
      From: onwingsofeaglestrust © ™ ®
      To: Michael-Philip: Rothermel
      Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 3:15 PM
      Subject: what did you do with Gabrielle’s cell phone telephone numbers “Michael-Philip: Rothermel”

      what did you do with Gabrielle’s https://gabriellegodling.wordpress.com/
      cell phone telephone numbers “Michael-Philip: Rothermel”

      Beverly Jane Clarkson Jeffery

      please reply: POST OFFICE
      TWENTY SEVEN,POINT LOOKOUT, MISSOURI
      65672
      CELL: 480 280 8365

      http://geminiinvestmentsresearchgroup.wordpress.com/forms

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sco_eBvXGTQ
      David Allan Coe – You Never Even Called Me By My Name”You Never Even Call Me By My Name”

      Well, it was all
      That I could do to keep from crying’
      Sometimes it seemed so useless to remain
      But you don’t have to call me darlin’, darlin’
      You never even call me by my name

      You don’t have to call me Waylon Jennings
      And you don’t have to call me Charlie pride
      And you don’t have to call me Merle Haggard anymore
      Even though you’re on my fighting’ side

      [Chorus:]
      And I’ll hang around as long as you will let me
      And I never minded standing’ in the rain
      But you don’t have to call me darlin’, darlin’
      You never even called me by my name

      Well, I’ve heard my name
      A few times in your phone book (hello, hello)
      And I’ve seen it on signs where I’ve played
      But the only time I know
      I’ll hear “David Allan Coe”
      Is when Jesus has his final judgment day

      [Repeat chorus]

      [Recitation:]
      Well, a friend of mine named Steve Goodman wrote that song
      And he told me it was the perfect country & western song
      I wrote him back a letter and I told him it was
      Not the perfect country & western song because he hadn’t said anything at all about mama,
      Or trains,
      Or trucks,
      Or prison,
      Or getting’ drunk
      Well he sat down and wrote another verse to the song
      And he sent it to me,
      And after reading it,
      I realized that my friend had written the perfect
      Country & western song
      And I felt obliged to include it on this album
      The last verse goes like this here:

      Well, I was drunk the day my mom got out of prison
      And I went to pick her up in the rain
      But before I could get to the station in my pickup truck
      She got run ned over by a damned old train

      [Chorus:]
      And I’ll hang around as long as you will let me
      And I never minded standing’ in the rain
      No, a’ you don’t have to call me darlin’, darlin’
      You never even call me
      Well I wonder why you don’t call me
      Why don’t you ever call me by my name

      Writer(s): Steve Goodman

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      5 3 2018 12:43 CST © ™ ® marylouclarkson http://www.truthpress.org

      Inbox

      Start Date:

      4/19/2018

      … End Date:

      5/3/2018

      … Unread Messages Only

      Delete

      From Subject Sent Date

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: April 19, 2018 TurtleIsland 4/22/2018 7:51:20 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: 10 57 April 21, 2018 Delaware,Cherokee Land S … 4/22/2018 7:51:06 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: RE: Charter Spectrum 4/22/2018 7:50:49 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: I did a re-write on the NAMES,let’s go ou … 4/22/2018 7:50:15 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … hitch 4/22/2018 2:37:39 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: relation ship harmony 4/22/2018 2:37:38 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: John Matthew 4/22/2018 2:37:22 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: RE: 4 6 2018 after you phoned and 4 18 2018 W … 4/22/2018 2:37:17 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: John Matthew 4/22/2018 2:36:01 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: Yes, I did 4/22/2018 2:35:58 PM Read

      1 2 3 4 5 6 7

      Messages are viewable for 30 days.

      Start Date:

      4/18/2018

      … End Date:

      5/2/2018

      … Unread Messages Only

      Delete

      From Subject Sent Date

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: at 11 56 am CST 4/29/2018 3:52:37 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: subitch or the god damn frederalas created th … 4/29/2018 3:52:27 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … Dc, 4/29/2018 3:52:22 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: RE: From Steven April 24, 2018 4/29/2018 3:51:15 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: Washington state notary public would help you … 4/29/2018 3:50:48 PM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: bundled package internet provides phone, land 4/29/2018 3:50:39 PM Read

      CLIFFORD KEITH HOBBS (3921904 … RE: who snitched me out to Andy? 4/28/2018 9:37:50 AM Read

      CLIFFORD KEITH HOBBS (3921904 … Counting the Omer 4/27/2018 11:51:06 AM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: RE: Midco cable 4/27/2018 5:48:18 AM Read

      MICHAEL HOWARD REED (04414048 … RE: Of Note: you ArchangelsOfJustice ? @archang … 4/27/2018 5:48:17 AM Read

      1 2 3 4 5 6 7

      Messages are viewable for 30 days.

      Return to Mailbox Return to Mailbox

      English Español Logged in as [email protected]. Logout

      The Battle of Dien Bien Phu (French: Bataille de Diên Biên Phu pronounced [bataj də djɛn bjɛn fy]; Vietnamese: Chiến dịch Điện Biên Phủ, IPA: [ɗîəˀn ɓīən fû]) was the climactic confrontation of the First Indochina War between the French Union’s French Far East Expeditionary Corps and Viet Minh communist-nationalist revolutionaries. It was, from the French view before the event, a set piece battle to draw out the Vietnamese and destroy them with superior firepower. The battle occurred between March and May 1954 and culminated in a comprehensive French defeat that influenced negotiations underway at Geneva among several nations over the future of Indochina.

      As a result of blunders in French decision-making, the French began an operation to insert, then support, the soldiers at Điện Biên Phủ, deep in the hills of northwestern Vietnam. Its purpose was to cut off Viet Minh supply lines into the neighboring Kingdom of Laos, a French ally, and tactically draw the Viet Minh into a major confrontation in order to cripple them. The plan was to resupply the French position by air, and was based on the belief that the Viet Minh had no anti-aircraft capability. The Viet Minh, however, under General Võ Nguyên Giáp, surrounded and besieged the French. The Viet Minh brought in vast amounts of heavy artillery (including antiaircraft guns). They moved these weapons through difficult terrain up the rear slopes of the mountains surrounding the French positions, dug tunnels through the mountain, and placed the artillery pieces overlooking the French encampment. This positioning of the artillery made it nearly impervious to French counter-battery fire.

      The Viet Minh opened fire with a massive artillery bombardment in March. After several days the French artillery commander, Charles Piroth, unable to respond with any effective counterbattery fire, committed suicide. The Viet Minh occupied the highlands around Điện Biên Phủ and bombarded the French positions. Tenacious fighting on the ground ensued, reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I. The French repeatedly repulsed Viet Minh assaults on their positions. Supplies and reinforcements were delivered by air, though as the key French positions were overrun, the French perimeter contracted and the air resupply on which the French had placed their hopes became impossible. As the Viet Minh antiaircraft fire took its toll, fewer and fewer of those supplies reached the French. The garrison was overrun in May after a two-month siege, and most of the French forces surrendered. A few of them escaped to Laos. The French government in Paris then resigned, and the new Prime Minister, the left-of-centre Pierre Mendès France, supported French withdrawal from Indochina.

      The war ended shortly after the Battle of Dien Bien Phu and the signing of the 1954 Geneva Accords. France agreed to withdraw its forces from all its colonies in French Indochina, while stipulating that Vietnam would be temporarily divided at the 17th parallel, with control of the north given to the Viet Minh as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh, and the south becoming the State of Vietnam, nominally under Emperor Bảo Đại, preventing Ho Chi Minh from gaining control of the entire country.[14] The refusal of Ngô Đình Diệm (the US-supported president of the first Republic of Vietnam [RVN]) to allow elections in 1956, as had been stipulated by the Geneva Conference, eventually led to the Vietnam War.

      Contents

      1 Background

      1.1 Military situation

      1.2 Nà Sản and the hedgehog concept

      2 Prelude

      2.1 Lead up to Castor

      2.2 Establishment of air operations

      3 Battle

      3.1 Beatrice

      3.2 Gabrielle

      3.3 Anne-Marie

      3.4 Lull

      3.5 30 March – 5 April assaults

      3.6 Trench warfare

      3.7 Isabelle

      3.8 Final attacks

      4 Aftermath

      4.1 Prisoners

      4.2 Political ramifications

      4.3 American participation

      4.4 Khe Sanh

      5 Women at Điện Biên Phủ

      6 In popular culture

      7 Battlefield today

      8 Notes

      9 References

      10 External links

      10.1 Media links

      Background

      Military situation

      By 1953, the First Indochina War was not going well for France. A succession of commanders — Philippe Leclerc de Hauteclocque, Jean Étienne Valluy, Roger Blaizot, Marcel Carpentier, Jean de Lattre de Tassigny, and Raoul Salan — had proven incapable of suppressing the insurrection of the Viet Minh fighting for independence. During their 1952–53 campaign, the Viet Minh had overrun vast swathes of Laos, a French ally and Vietnam’s western neighbor, advancing as far as Luang Prabang and the Plain of Jars. The French were unable to slow the Viet Minh advance, who fell back only after outrunning their always-tenuous supply lines. In 1953, the French had begun to strengthen their defenses in the Hanoi delta region to prepare for a series of offensives against Viet Minh staging areas in northwest Vietnam. They set up fortified towns and outposts in the area, including Lai Châu near the Chinese border to the north,[15] Nà Sản to the west of Hanoi,[16] and the Plain of Jars in northern Laos.[17]

      In May 1953, French Premier René Mayer appointed Henri Navarre, a trusted colleague, to take command of French Union Forces in Indochina. Mayer had given Navarre a single order—to create military conditions that would lead to an “honorable political solution”.[18] According to military scholar Phillip Davidson,

      On arrival, Navarre was shocked by what he found. There had been no long-range plan since de Lattre’s departure. Everything was conducted on a day-to-day, reactive basis. Combat operations were undertaken only in response to enemy moves or threats. There was no comprehensive plan to develop the organization and build up the equipment of the Expeditionary force. Finally, Navarre, the intellectual, the cold and professional soldier, was shocked by the “school’s out” attitude of Salan and his senior commanders and staff officers. They were going home, not as victors or heroes, but then, not as clear losers either. To them the important thing was that they were getting out of Indochina with their reputations frayed, but intact. They gave little thought to, or concern for, the problems of their successors.[18]

      Nà Sản and the hedgehog concept

      Further information: Battle of Nà Sản

      Simultaneously, Navarre had been searching for a way to stop the Viet Minh threat to Laos. Colonel Louis Berteil, commander of Mobile Group 7 and Navarre’s main planner,[19] formulated the hérisson (“hedgehog”) concept. The French army would establish a fortified airhead by airlifting soldiers adjacent to a key Viet Minh supply line to Laos.[20] They would cut off Viet Minh soldiers fighting in Laos and force them to withdraw. “It was an attempt to interdict the enemy’s rear area, to stop the flow of supplies and reinforcements, to establish a redoubt in the enemy’s rear and disrupt his lines”.[21]

      The hedgehog concept was based on French experiences at the Battle of Nà Sản. In late November and early December 1952, Giáp attacked the French outpost at Nà Sản, which was essentially an “air-land base”, a fortified camp supplied only by air.[22] The French beat back Giáp’s forces repeatedly, causing them to suffer very heavy losses. The French hoped that by repeating the strategy on a much larger scale, they would be able to lure Giáp into committing the bulk of his forces in a massed assault. This would enable superior French artillery, armor, and air support to decimate the exposed Viet Minh forces. The experience at Nà Sản convinced Navarre of the viability of the fortified airhead concept.[citation needed]

      French staff officers disastrously failed to treat seriously several crucial differences between Điện Biên Phủ and Nà Sản: First, at Nà Sản, the French commanded most of the high ground with overwhelming artillery support.[23] At Điện Biên Phủ, however, the Viet Minh controlled much of the high ground around the valley, their artillery far exceeded French expectations, and they outnumbered the French troops four to one.[3] Giáp compared Điện Biên Phủ to a “rice bowl,” where his troops occupied the edge and the French the bottom.[citation needed] Second, Giáp made a mistake in Nà Sản by committing his forces to reckless frontal attacks before being fully prepared. He learned his lesson: at Điện Biên Phủ, Giáp spent months meticulously stockpiling ammunition and emplacing heavy artillery and antiaircraft guns before making his move. Teams of Viet Minh volunteers were sent into the French camp to scout the disposition of the French artillery. Wooden artillery pieces were built as decoys and the real guns were rotated every few salvos to confuse French counterbattery fire. As a result, when the battle finally began, the Viet Minh knew exactly where the French artillery pieces were, while the French did not even know how many guns Giáp possessed.[citation needed] Third, the aerial resupply lines at Nà Sản were never severed, despite Viet Minh antiaircraft fire. At Điện Biên Phủ, Giáp amassed antiaircraft batteries that quickly shut down the runway, and made it extremely difficult and costly for the French to bring in reinforcements.[citation needed]

      Prelude

      Lead up to Castor

      In June, Major General René Cogny, the commander of the Tonkin Delta, proposed Điện Biên Phủ, which had an old airstrip built by the Japanese during World War II, as a “mooring point”.[24] In another misunderstanding, Cogny envisioned a lightly defended point from which to launch raids; however, Navarre believed that he intended a heavily fortified base capable of withstanding a siege. Navarre selected Điện Biên Phủ for the location of Berteil’s “hedgehog” operation. When presented with the plan, every major subordinate officer protested: Colonel Jean-Louis Nicot (commander of the French Air transport fleet), Cogny, and generals Jean Gilles and Jean Dechaux (the ground and air commanders for Operation Castor, the initial airborne assault on Điện Biên Phủ). Cogny pointed out, presciently, that “we are running the risk of a new Nà Sản under worse conditions”.[25] Navarre rejected the criticisms of his proposal and concluded a November 17 conference by declaring that the operation would begin three days later, on 20 November 1953.[26][27]

      Navarre decided to go ahead with the operation, despite operational difficulties. These later became painfully obvious (but at the time may have been less apparent).[28] He had been repeatedly assured by his intelligence officers that the operation had very little risk of involvement by a strong enemy force.[29] Navarre had previously considered three other ways to defend Laos: mobile warfare, which was impossible given the terrain in Vietnam; a static defense line stretching to Laos, which was not feasible given the number of troops at Navarre’s disposal; or placing troops in the Laotian provincial capitals and supplying them by air, which was unworkable due to the distance from Hanoi to Luang Prabang and Vientiane.[30] Navarre believed that he was left only with the hedgehog option, which he characterized as “a mediocre solution”.[31] The French National Defense Committee ultimately agreed that Navarre’s responsibility did not include defending Laos. However, its decision (which was drawn up on 13 November) was not delivered to him until 4 December, two weeks after the Điện Biên Phủ operation began.[32]

      Establishment of air operations

      Further information on Dien Bien Phu order of battle: Operation Castor

      Col. Christian de Castries, French commander at Điện Biên Phủ

      Operations at Điện Biên Phủ began at 10:35 on the morning of 20 November 1953. In Operation Castor, the French dropped or flew 9,000 troops into the area over three days, including a bulldozer to prepare the airstrip. They were landed at three drop zones: “Natasha” (northwest), “Octavie” (southwest), and “Simone” (southeast) of Điện Biên Phủ.[33] The Viet Minh elite 148th Independent Infantry Regiment, headquartered at Điện Biên Phủ, reacted “instantly and effectively”. Three of its four battalions, however, were absent that day.[34] Initial operations proceeded well for the French. By the end of November, six parachute battalions had been landed, and the French Army was consolidating its positions.

      It was at this time that Giáp began his countermoves. He had expected an attack, but could not foresee when or where it would occur. Giáp realized that, if pressed, the French would abandon Lai Châu Province and fight a pitched battle at Điện Biên Phủ.[35] On 24 November, Giáp ordered the 148th Infantry Regiment and the 316th Division to attack Lai Chau, while the 308th, 312th, and 351st divisions assault Điện Biên Phủ from Việt Bắc.[35]

      Starting in December, the French, under the command of Colonel Christian de Castries, began transforming their anchoring point into a fortress by setting up seven satellite positions. (Each was said to be named after a former mistress of de Castries, although the allegation is probably unfounded, as the eight names begin with letters from the first nine of the alphabet, excluding F.) The fortified headquarters was centrally located, with positions “Huguette” to the west, “Claudine” to the south, and “Dominique” to the northeast.[36] The other positions were “Anne-Marie” to the northwest, “Beatrice” to the northeast, “Gabrielle” to the north, and “Isabelle” 6 km (3.7 mi) to the south, covering the reserve airstrip.

      The choice of de Castries as the local commander at Điện Biên Phủ was, in retrospect, a bad one. Navarre had picked de Castries, a cavalryman in the 18th-century tradition,[37] because Navarre envisioned Điện Biên Phủ as a mobile battle. Điện Biên Phủ required someone adept at World War I-style trench warfare, something for which de Castries was not suited.[36]

      The arrival of the 316th Viet Minh Division prompted Cogny to order the evacuation of the Lai Chau garrison to Điện Biên Phủ, exactly as Giáp had anticipated. En route, they were virtually annihilated by the Viet Minh. “Of the 2,100 men who left Lai Chau on 9 December, only 185 made it to Điện Biên Phủ on 22 December. The rest had been killed, captured, or deserted”.[38] The Viet Minh troops converged on Điện Biên Phủ.

      One of the ten French M24 Chaffee light tanks, (supplied by the USA) as seen here, deployed at the battle at Dien Bien Phu.

      French military forces had committed 10,800 troops, together with yet more reinforcements, totalling nearly 16,000 men, to the defense of a monsoon-affected valley surrounded by heavily-wooded hills and high ground that had not been secured. Artillery as well as ten American M24 Chaffee light tanks and numerous aircraft (attack and supply types) were committed to the garrison. This included France’s regular troops (notably elite paratrooper units, plus those of the artillery), French Foreign Legionnaires, Algerian and Moroccan tirailleurs (colonial mercenaries of North Africa) and locally-recruited Indochinese (Laotian, Vietnamese and Cambodian) infantry.

      In comparison, all together, the Viet Minh had moved up to 50,000 regular troops into the hills surrounding the French-held valley, totalling five divisions, including the 351st Heavy Division, which was an artillery formation and was entirely equipped with medium artillery, such as the US M101 105mm howitzer, supplied by the neighbouring People’s Republic of China (PRC), together with some heavier field-guns as well as anti-aircraft artillery.[5] Various types of artillery and anti-aircraft guns (mainly of Soviet origin), which outnumbered their French counterparts by about four to one,[5] were moved into strategic positions and locations overlooking the valley and the French forces based in there. The French garrison came under sporadic direct artillery fire from the Viet Minh for the first time on 31 January 1954 and patrols encountered the Viet Minh troops in all directions around them. The French were completely surrounded.[39]

      Battle

      Beatrice

      The French disposition at Điện Biên Phủ, as of March 1954. The French took up positions on a series of fortified hills. The southmost one, Isabelle, was dangerously isolated. The Viet Minh positioned their five divisions (the 304th, 308th, 312th, 316th, and 351st) in the surrounding areas to the north and east. From these areas, the Viet Minh had a clear line of sight on the French fortifications and were able to accurately rain down artillery on the French positions.

      The Viet Minh assault began in earnest on 13 March 1954 with an attack on outpost “Beatrice”. Viet Minh artillery opened a fierce bombardment of the fortification and French command was disrupted at 18:15 when a shell hit the French command post, killing the Legionnaire commander Major Paul Pegot and his entire staff. A few minutes later, Colonel Jules Gaucher, commander of the entire northern sector, was killed by Viet Minh artillery. The Viet Minh 312th Division then launched a massive infantry assault, using sappers to defeat French obstacles. French resistance at Beatrice collapsed shortly after midnight following a fierce battle. Roughly 500 French legionnaires were killed. The French estimated that Viet Minh losses totalled 600 dead and 1,200 wounded.[40] The French launched a counterattack against “Beatrice” on the following morning, but it was quickly beaten back by Viet Minh artillery. The victory at “Beatrice” “galvanized the morale” of the Viet Minh troops.[40]

      Much to French disbelief, the Viet Minh had employed direct artillery fire, in which each gun crew does its own artillery spotting (as opposed to indirect fire, in which guns are massed further away from the target, out of direct line of sight, and rely on a forward artillery spotter). Indirect artillery, generally held as being far superior to direct fire, requires experienced, well-trained crews and good communications, which the Viet Minh lacked.[41] Navarre wrote that, “Under the influence of Chinese advisers, the Viet Minh commanders had used processes quite different from the classic methods. The artillery had been dug in by single pieces…They were installed in shellproof dugouts, and fire point-blank from portholes…This way of using artillery and AA guns was possible only with the expansive ant holes at the disposal of the Vietminh and was to make shambles of all the estimates of our own artillerymen.” [42] Two days later, the French artillery commander, Colonel Charles Piroth, distraught at his inability to bring counterfire on the well-camouflaged Viet Minh batteries, went into his dugout and committed suicide with a hand grenade.[43] He was buried there in secret to prevent loss of morale among the French troops.[43]

      Gabrielle

      Following a five-hour cease fire on the morning of 14 March, Viet Minh artillery resumed pounding French positions. The air strip, already closed since 16:00 the day before due to a light bombardment, was now put permanently out of commission.[44] Any further French supplies would have to be delivered by parachute.[45] That night, the Viet Minh launched an attack on “Gabrielle”, held by an elite Algerian battalion. The attack began with a concentrated artillery barrage at 17:00. This was very effective and stunned the defenders. Two regiments from the crack 308th Division attacked starting at 20:00. At 04:00 the following morning, an artillery shell hit the battalion headquarters, severely wounding the battalion commander and most of his staff.[45]

      De Castries ordered a counterattack to relieve “Gabrielle”. However, Colonel Pierre Langlais, in forming the counterattack, chose to rely on the 5th Vietnamese Parachute Battalion, which had jumped in the day before and was exhausted.[46] Although some elements of the counterattack reached “Gabrielle”, most were paralyzed by Viet Minh artillery and took heavy losses. At 08:00 the next day, the Algerian battalion fell back, abandoning “Gabrielle” to the Viet Minh. The French lost around 1,000 men defending Gabrielle, and the Viet Minh between 1,000 and 2,000 attacking the strongpoint.[46] The loss of the outpost “Beatrice” and now “Gabrielle”, allowed almost pinpoint artillery to be rained down for the rest of the battle and cut off any air resupply using the airstrip, and this dictated the resulting events.[citation needed]

      Anne-Marie

      “Anne-Marie” was defended by Tai troops, members of a Vietnamese ethnic minority loyal to the French. For weeks, Giáp had distributed subversive propaganda leaflets, telling the Tais that this was not their fight. The fall of “Beatrice” and “Gabrielle” had severely demoralized them. On the morning of 17 March, under the cover of fog, the bulk of the Tais left or defected. The French and the few remaining Tais on “Anne-Marie” were then forced to withdraw.[47]

      Lull

      17 March through 30 March saw a lull in fighting. The Viet Minh further tightened the noose around the French central area (formed by the strongpoints “Huguette”, “Dominique”, “Claudine”, and “Eliane”), effectively cutting off Isabelle and its 1,809 personnel.[48] During this lull, the French suffered from a serious crisis of command. “It had become painfully evident to the senior officers within the encircled garrison — and even to Cogny at Hanoi — that de Castries was incompetent to conduct the defense of Dien Bien Phu. Even more critical, after the fall of the northern outposts, he isolated himself in his bunker so that he had, in effect, relinquished his command authority”.[49] On 17 March, Cogny attempted to fly into Điện Biên Phủ to take command, but his plane was driven off by antiaircraft fire. Cogny considered parachuting into the encircled garrison, but his staff talked him out of it.[49]

      De Castries’ seclusion in his bunker, combined with his superiors’ inability to replace him, created a leadership vacuum within the French command. On 24 March, an event took place which later became a matter of historical debate. The historian Bernard Fall records, based on Langlais’ memoirs, that Colonel Langlais and his fellow paratroop commanders, all fully armed, confronted de Castries in his bunker on 24 March. They told him he would retain the appearance of command, but that Langlais would exercise it.[50] De Castries is said by Fall to have accepted the arrangement without protest, although he did exercise some command functions thereafter. Phillip Davidson stated that the “truth would seem to be that Langlais did take over effective command of Dien Bien Phu, and that Castries became ‘commander emeritus’ who transmitted messages to Hanoi and offered advice about matters in Dien Bien Phu”.[51] Jules Roy, however, makes no mention of this event, and Martin Windrow argues that the “paratrooper putsch” is unlikely to have ever happened. Both historians record that Langlais and Marcel Bigeard were known to be on good terms with their commanding officer.[52]

      The French aerial resupply took heavy losses from Viet Minh machine guns near the landing strip. On 27 March, the Hanoi air transport commander, Nicot, ordered that all supply deliveries be made from 2,000 m (6,600 ft) or higher; losses were expected to remain heavy.[53] De Castries ordered an attack against the Viet Minh machine guns 3 km (1.9 mi) west of Điện Biên Phủ. Remarkably, the attack was a complete success, with 350 Viet Minh soldiers killed and seventeen AA machine guns destroyed (French estimate), while the French lost 20 killed and 97 wounded.[54]

      30 March – 5 April assaults

      Further information: Operation Condor (1954)

      The central French positions at Điện Biên Phủ in late March 1954. The positions in Eliane saw some of the most intense combat of the entire battle.

      The next phase of the battle saw more massed Viet Minh assaults against French positions in the central Điện Biên Phủ — at “Eliane” and “Dominique” in particular. Those two areas were held by five understrength battalions, composed of Frenchmen, Legionnaires, Vietnamese, North Africans, and Tais.[55] Giáp planned to use the tactics from the “Beatrice” and “Gabrielle” skirmishes.

      At 19:00 on 30 March, the Viet Minh 312th Division captured “Dominique 1 and 2″, making “Dominique 3″ the final outpost between the Viet Minh and the French general headquarters, as well as outflanking all positions east of the river.[56] At this point, the French 4th Colonial Artillery Regiment entered the fight, setting its 105 mm howitzers to zero elevation and firing directly on the Viet Minh attackers, blasting huge holes in their ranks. Another group of French soldiers, near the airfield, opened fire on the Viet Minh with antiaircraft machine guns, forcing the Viet Minh to retreat.[56]

      The Viet Minh’s simultaneous attacks elsewhere were more successful. The 316th Division captured “Eliane 1″ from its Moroccan defenders, and half of “Eliane 2″ by midnight.[57] On the other side of Điện Biên Phủ, the 308th attacked “Huguette 7″, and nearly succeeded in breaking through, but a French sergeant took charge of the defenders and sealed the breach.[57]

      Just after midnight on 31 March, the French launched a counterattack against “Eliane 2″, and recaptured half of it. Langlais ordered another counterattack the following afternoon against “Dominique 2″ and “Eliane 1″, using virtually “everybody left in the garrison who could be trusted to fight”.[57] The counterattacks allowed the French to retake “Dominique 2″ and Eliane 1, but the Viet Minh launched their own renewed assault. The French, who were exhausted and without reserves, fell back from both positions late in the afternoon.[58] Reinforcements were sent north from “Isabelle”, but were attacked en route and fell back to “Isabelle”.

      The French deployed a small number of M24 Chaffee light tanks during the battle that proved critical in repelling the enemy attacks.

      Shortly after dark on 31 March, Langlais told Major Marcel Bigeard, who was leading the defense at “Eliane”, to fall back across the river. Bigeard refused, saying “As long as I have one man alive I won’t let go of ‘Eliane 4′. Otherwise, Dien Bien Phu is done for.”[59] The night of the 31st, the 316th Division attacked “Eliane 2″. Just as it appeared the French were about to be overrun, a few French tanks arrived, and helped push the Viet Minh back. Smaller attacks on “Eliane 4″ were also pushed back. The Viet Minh briefly captured “Huguette 7″, only to be pushed back by a French counterattack at dawn on 1 April.[60]

      Fighting continued in this manner over the next several nights. The Viet Minh repeatedly attacked “Eliane 2″, only to be beaten back. Repeated attempts to reinforce the French garrison by parachute drops were made, but had to be carried out by lone planes at irregular times to avoid excessive casualties from Viet Minh antiaircraft fire. Some reinforcements did arrive, but not enough to replace French casualties.[60]

      Trench warfare

      French troops seeking cover in trenches.

      On 5 April, after a long night of battle, French fighter-bombers and artillery inflicted particularly devastating losses on one Viet Minh regiment, which was caught on open ground. At that point, Giáp decided to change tactics. Although Giáp still had the same objective — to overrun French defenses east of the river — he decided to employ entrenchment and sapping to try to achieve it.[61]

      On 10 April, the French attempted to retake “Eliane 1″, which had been lost eleven days earlier. The loss posed a significant threat to “Eliane 4″, and the French wanted to eliminate that threat. The dawn attack, which Bigeard devised, was preceded by a short, massive artillery barrage, followed by small unit infiltration attacks, followed by mopping-up operations. “Eliane 1″ changed hands several times that day, but by the next morning the French had control of the strongpoint. The Viet Minh attempted to retake it on the evening of 12 April, but were pushed back.[62]

      At this point, the morale of the Viet Minh soldiers was greatly lowered due to the massive casualties they had received. During a period of stalemate from 15 April to 1 May, the French intercepted enemy radio messages which told of whole units refusing orders to attack, and communist prisoners said that they were told to advance or be shot by the officers and noncommissioned officers behind them.[63] Worse still, the Viet Minh lacked advanced medical care, with one stating that “Nothing strikes at combat morale like the knowledge that if wounded, the soldier will go uncared for”.[64] To avert the crisis of mutiny, Giáp called in fresh reinforcements from Laos.[citation needed]

      During the fighting at “Eliane 1″, on the other side of camp, the Viet Minh entrenchments had almost entirely surrounded “Huguette 1 and 6″. On 11 April, the garrison of “Huguette 1″ attacked, and was joined by artillery from the garrison of “Claudine”. The goal was to resupply “Huguette 6″ with water and ammunition. The attacks were repeated on the nights of the 14–15 and 16–17 April. While they did succeed in getting some supplies through, the French suffered heavy casualties, which convinced Langlais to abandon “Huguette 6″. Following a failed attempt to link up, on 18 April, the defenders at “Huguette 6″ made a daring break out, but only a few managed to make it to French lines.[65][66] The Viet Minh repeated the isolation and probing attacks against Huguette 1, and overran the fort on the morning of 22 April. With the fall of “Huguette 1″, the Viet Minh took control of more than 90 percent of the airfield, making accurate parachute drops impossible.[67] This caused the landing zone to become perilously small, and effectively choked off much needed supplies.[68] A French attack against “Huguette 1″ later that day was repulsed.[citation needed]

      Isabelle

      “Isabelle” saw only light action until 30 March, when the Viet Minh isolated it and beat back the attempt to send reinforcements north. Following a massive artillery barrage on 30 March, the Viet Minh began employing the same trench warfare tactics that they were using against the central camp. By the end of April, “Isabelle” had exhausted its water supply and was nearly out of ammunition.[69]

      Final attacks

      Viet Minh troops plant their flag over the captured French headquarters.

      The Viet Minh launched a massed assault against the exhausted defenders on the night of 1 May, overrunning “Eliane 1″, “Dominique 3″, and “Huguette 5″, although the French managed to beat back attacks on “Eliane 2″. On 6 May, the Viet Minh launched another massed attack against “Eliane 2″. The attack included, for the first time, Katyusha rockets.[40] The French artillery fired a “TOT” (Time On Target) attack, so artillery rounds fired from different positions would strike on target at the same time.[70] This barrage defeated the first assault wave. A few hours later that night, the Viet Minh detonated a mine shaft, blowing “Eliane 2″ up. The Viet Minh attacked again, and within a few hours then had overrun the defenders.[71]

      On 7 May, Giáp ordered an all-out attack against the remaining French units with over 25,000 Viet Minh against fewer than 3,000 garrison troops. At 17:00, de Castries radioed French headquarters in Hanoi and talked with Cogny.

      De Castries: “The Viets are everywhere. The situation is very grave. The combat is confused and goes on all about. I feel the end is approaching, but we will fight to the finish.”

      Cogny: “Of course you will fight to the end. It is out of the question to run up the white flag after your heroic resistance.”[37]

      The last radio transmission from the French headquarters reported that enemy troops were directly outside the headquarters bunker and that all the positions had been overrun. The radio operator in his last words stated: “The enemy has overrun us. We are blowing up everything. Vive la France!” That night the garrison made a breakout attempt, in the Camarón tradition. While some of the main body managed to break out, none succeeded in escaping from the valley. However at “Isabelle”, a similar attempt later the same night saw about 70 troops, out of 1,700 men in the garrison, escape to Laos.[72] By about 6:20 PM, only one French position, strongpoint Lily, manned by Moroccan soldiers commanded by a French officer, Major Jean Nicholas, had not been overrun. The position surrendered that night when Nicholas personally waved a small white flag (probably a handkerchief) from his rifle.[73]

      Aftermath

      Prisoners

      Captured French soldiers from Dien Bien Phu, escorted by Vietnamese troops, walk to a prisoner-of-war camp

      On 8 May, the Viet Minh counted 11,721 prisoners, of whom 4,436 were wounded.[74] This was the greatest number the Viet Minh had ever captured: one-third of the total captured during the entire war. The prisoners were divided into groups. Able-bodied soldiers were force-marched over 600 km (370 mi) to prison camps to the north and east,[75] where they were intermingled with Viet Minh soldiers to discourage French bombing runs.[76] Hundreds died of disease along the way. The wounded were given basic first aid until the Red Cross arrived, extracted 858 prisoners, and provided better aid to the remainder. Those wounded who were not evacuated by the Red Cross were sent into detention.[77]

      The Viet Minh captured 8,000 French and marched them 500 miles on foot to prison camps; less than half survived the march.[78] Of 10,863 prisoners (including Vietnamese fighting for the French), only 3,290 were officially repatriated four months later;[79] however, the losses figure may include the 3,013 prisoners of Vietnamese origin whose eventual fate is unknown.[80]

      Political ramifications

      The garrison constituted roughly a tenth of the total French Union manpower in Indochina.[81] The defeat seriously weakened the position and prestige of the French as previously planned negotiations over the future of Indochina began.

      The Geneva Conference opened on 8 May 1954,[82] the day after the surrender of the garrison. Ho Chi Minh entered the conference on the opening day with the news of his troops’ victory in the headlines. The resulting agreement temporarily partitioned Vietnam into two zones: the North was administered by the communist Democratic Republic of Vietnam while the South was administered by the French-supported State of Vietnam. The last units of the French Union forces withdrew from Indochina in 1956. This partition was supposed to be temporary, and the two zones were meant to be reunited through national elections in 1956. After the French withdrawal, the United States supported the southern government, under Emperor Bao Dai and Prime Minister Ngo Dinh Diem, which opposed the Geneva agreement, and which claimed that Ho Chi Minh’s forces from the North had been killing Northern loyalists and terrorizing people both north and south. The North was supported by both the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Soviet Union (USSR). This arrangement proved tenuous and escalated into the Vietnam War (Second Indochina War), eventually bringing 500,000 American troops into South Vietnam.[citation needed]

      France’s defeat in Indochina, coupled with the German destruction of her armies just 14 years earlier, seriously damaged its prestige elsewhere in its colonial empire, as well as with its NATO allies, most importantly, the United States. Within its empire, the defeat in Indochina served to spur independence movements in other colonies, notably the North African territories from which many of the troops who fought at Điện Biên Phủ had been recruited.[citation needed]

      In 1954, six months after the battle at Điện Biên Phủ ended, the Algerian War started, and by 1956, both the Moroccan and Tunisian protectorates had gained independence. A French board of inquiry, the Catroux Commission, later investigated the defeat.[citation needed]

      American participation

      Further information: Operation Vulture

      According to the Mutual Defense Assistance Act, the United States provided the French with material aid during the battle – aircraft (supplied by the USS Saipan), weapons, mechanics, 24 CIA/CAT pilots, and U.S. Air Force maintenance crews.[83] The United States, however, intentionally avoided overt direct intervention. In February 1954, following the French occupation of Điện Biên Phủ but before the battle, Democratic senator Michael Mansfield asked the United States Defense Secretary, Charles Erwin Wilson, whether the United States would send naval or air units if the French were subjected to greater pressure there, but Wilson replied that “for the moment there is no justification for raising United States aid above its present level”. President Dwight D. Eisenhower also stated, “Nobody is more opposed to intervention than I am”.[83] On 31 March, following the fall of “Beatrice”, “Gabrielle”, and “Anne-Marie”, a panel of U.S. Senators and House Representatives questioned the American Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Arthur W. Radford, about the possibility of American involvement. Radford concluded it was too late for the U.S. Air Force to save the French garrison. A proposal for direct intervention was unanimously voted down by the committee, which “concluded that intervention was a positive act of war”.[84]

      The United States did covertly participate in the battle. Following a request for help from Henri Navarre, Radford provided two squadrons of B-26 Invader bomber aircraft to support the French. Following this, 37 American transport pilots flew 682 sorties over the course of the battle.[85] Earlier, in order to succeed the pre-Điện Biên Phủ Operation Castor of November 1953, General Chester McCarty made available 12 additional C-119 Flying Boxcars flown by French crews.[85]

      Two of the American pilots, James McGovern, Jr., and Wallace Buford, were killed in action during the siege of Điện Biên Phủ.[86] On 25 February 2005, the seven still living American pilots were awarded the French Legion of Honor by Jean-David Levitte, the French ambassador to the United States.[85] The role that the American pilots played in this battle had remained little known until 2004. The American historian Erik Kirsinger researched the case for more than a year to establish the facts.[87][88]

      The French author Jules Roy suggests that Admiral Radford discussed with the French the possibility of using nuclear weapons in support of the French garrison.[89] Moreover, John Foster Dulles reportedly mentioned the possibility of lending atomic bombs to the French for use at Điện Biên Phủ,[90] and a similar source claims that the British Foreign Secretary Sir Anthony Eden was aware of the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons in that region.[91]

      Khe Sanh

      Main article: Battle of Khe Sanh

      In January 1968, during the Vietnam War, the North Vietnamese Army under Võ Nguyên Giáp’s command initiated a siege and artillery bombardment on the U.S. Marine Corps base at Khe Sanh, South Vietnam. Historians are divided on whether this was a genuine attempt to repeat their success at Điện Biên Phủ by forcing the surrender of the Marine base, or else a diversion from the rest of the Tết Offensive, or an example of the North Vietnamese Army keeping its options open. At Khe Sanh, a number of factors were significantly different from Điện Biên Phủ. Khe Sanh was much closer to an American supply base (45 km or 28 mi) compared to a French one at Điện Biên Phủ (200 km or 120 mi).[92]

      At Khe Sanh, the U.S. Marines held the high ground, and their artillery forced the North Vietnamese to use their own artillery from a much greater distance. By contrast, at Điện Biên Phủ, the French artillery (six 105 mm batteries and one battery of four 155 mm howitzers and mortars[93]) was only sporadically effective;[94] Furthermore, by 1968, the American military presence in Vietnam dwarfed that of the French, and included numerous technological advances such as effective helicopters.

      Khe Sanh received 18,000 tons of aerial resupplies during the 77-day battle, whereas during the 167 days that the French forces at Điện Biên Phủ held out, they received only 4,000 tons.[94] Also, the US Air Force dropped 114,810 tons of bombs upon the Vietnamese at Khe Sanh – roughly as many as on Japan during 1945 during World War II.[95]

      Women at Điện Biên Phủ

      Many of the flights operated by the French Air force to evacuate casualties had female flight nurses on board. A total of 15 women served on flights to Điện Biên Phủ. One, Geneviève de Galard, was stranded there when her plane was destroyed by shellfire while being repaired on the airfield. She remained on the ground providing medical services in the field hospital until the surrender. She was referred to as the “Angel of Điện Biên Phủ”. Historians disagree regarding this moniker, with Martin Windrow maintaining that de Galard was referred to by this name by the garrison itself, but Michael Kenney and Bernard Fall maintaining it was added by outside press agencies.[96]

      The French forces came to Điện Biên Phủ accompanied by two bordels mobiles de campagne, (“mobile field brothels”), served by Algerian and Vietnamese women.[97] When the siege ended, the Viet Minh sent the surviving Vietnamese women for “re-education”.[98]

      In popular culture

      This battle was depicted in at least three films:

      Jump into Hell (1955), an American film directed by David Butler that was shot in the U.S. and released by Warner Bros.

      Dien Bien Phu (1992), a docudrama film with autobiographical elements, made by Điện Biên Phủ veteran and French director Pierre Schoendoerffer, in conjunction with the Vietnamese army.

      Memory of Dien Bien (2004), a war drama directed by Đỗ Minh Tuấn, about a Vietnamese and a French war veteran looking back at the battle.

      The last battle was depicted in 2011 Vietnamese first person shooter video game 7554.

      Battlefield today

      Today the battlefield is a large historical site. French positions such as Beatrice, Isabelle, Elaine, Muong Thanh Bridge and De Castries’s Bunker have been preserved. Nearly 30 kilometres away from the centre of Dien Bien Phu lays the Viet Minh army complex ranging from shelters and trenches, also preserved in Muong Phang village. A 96-meter underground tunnel connects the working places of General Võ Nguyên Giáp and General Hoàng Văn Thái. In addition monuments and memorials to both sides are situated in the region.

      A 37 mm automatic air defense gun M1939 used by the Viet Minh during the battle.

      Captured French artillery at the Dien Bien Phu Museum

      Explosive crater at the top of Eliane 2

      French memorial

      Viet Minh memorial

      Notes

      Anthony James Joes (2010). Victorious Insurgencies: Four Rebellions that Shaped Our World. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 121–. ISBN 0-8131-2614-2.

      http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2013/9311/pdf/DaoDucThuan_2013_02_05.pdf

      Davidson, 224

      French Ambassy in the United States: News from France 05.02 (March 2, 2005), U.S. pilots honored for Indochina Service, Seven American Pilots were awarded the Legion of Honor…

      Davidson, p. 223

      Lam Quang Thi, Andrew Wiest Hell in An Loc: The 1972 Easter Invasion, University of North Texas Press (2009), p. 14

      Lam Quang Thi, p. 14

      Tragic Mountains: The Hmong, the Americans, and the Secret Wars for Laos, trang 62, Indiana University Press

      French Defense Ministry’s archives, ECPAD[dead link]

      “French Air Force in Vietnam text”.

      “Battle of Dien Bien Phu”. HistoryNet.

      Ban tổng kết-biên soạn lịch sử, BTTM (1991). Lịch sử Bộ Tổng tham mưu trong kháng chiến chống Pháp 1945-1954. Ha Noi: Nhà xuất bản Quân Đội Nhân Dân. p. 799. (History Study Board of The General Staff (1991). History of the General Staff in the Resistance War against the French 1945–1954 (in Vietnamese). Ha Noi: People’s Army Publishing House. p. 799.).

      Stone, p. 109

      Nash, Gary B., Julie Roy Jeffrey, John R. Howe, Peter J. Frederick, Allen F. Davis, Allan M. Winkler, Charlene Mires, and Carla Gardina Pestana. The American People, Concise Edition Creating a Nation and a Society, Combined Volume (6th Edition). New York: Longman, 2007.

      Bernard Fall, p. 23

      Fall, 9

      Fall, p. 48

      Davidson, p. 165

      Fall, p. 44

      Davidson, p. 173

      Kennedy, Bruce. “1954 battle changed Vietnam’s history”, CNN special Archived December 19, 2008, at the Wayback Machine.

      Fall, 24

      Davidson, 147

      Davidson, p. 182

      Roy, p. 21

      Roy, p. 33

      Davidson, p. 184

      Windrow, pp. 211, 212, 228, 275

      Davidson, p. 189

      Davidson, p. 186

      Davidson, 187

      Davidson, p. 176

      Davidson, 194

      Davidson, p. 193

      Davidson, p. 196

      Davidson, p. 199

      “INDO-CHINA: The Fall of Dienbienphu [sic]“. Time. 1954-05-17.

      Davidson, p. 203

      Davidson, p. 220

      Davidson, p. 236

      Davidson, p. 227

      Navarre, p. 225

      Windrow, p. 412

      Simpson, Howard R., “Dien Bien Phu: the epic battle America forgot”.

      Davidson, p. 237

      Davidson, p. 238

      Davidson, p. 239

      Fall, p. 279

      Davidson, pp. 240–241

      Fall, 177

      Davidson, p. 243

      Windrow, pp. 441–44.

      Davidson, p. 244

      Davidson, pp. 244–45

      Davidson, p. 245

      Davidson, p. 246

      Davidson, p. 247

      Davidson, p. 248

      Roy, p. 210

      Davidson, p. 253

      Davidson, pp. 254–55

      Davidson, p. 265

      Davidson, p. 256

      Davidson, p. 257

      Davidson, p. 258

      Fall, p. 260

      Fall, p. 270

      Davidson, p. 259

      Davidson, p. 260

      Davidson, p. 261

      Davidson, p. 262

      Davidson, p. 269

      https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2004/05/02/general/a-battle-for-the-fate-of-the-world/#.WrmcKohubIU

      “Breakdown of losses suffered at Dien Bien Phu”. dienbienphu.org. Retrieved 24 August 2006.

      “The Long March”. dienbienphu.org. Retrieved 24 August 2006.

      Fall, p. 429

      “The Long March”. Dienbienphu.org, Retrieved 12 January 2009

      “French fall to Viet Minh at Dien Bien Phu – May 07, 1954 – HISTORY.com”. HISTORY.com. Retrieved 2017-02-19.

      “Battle of Dien Bien Phu | Chemins de Mémoire – Ministère de la Défense – Ministère de la Défense”. http://www.cheminsdememoire.gouv.fr. Retrieved 2017-02-19.

      Jean-Jacques Arzalier, Les Pertes Humaines, 1954–2004: La Bataille de Dien Bien Phu, entre Histoire et Mémoire, Société française d’histoire d’outre-mer, 2004

      “The French Far East Expeditionary Corps numbered 175,000 soldiers” – Davidson, p. 163

      The Geneva conference actually opened on 26 April 1954, discussed Korea, and reached the second agenda item, Indo-China, on 8 May.

      Roy, p. 140

      Roy, 211

      Embassy of France in the USA, Feb. 25, 2005, U.S. Pilots Honored For Indochina Service

      “The Shootdown of “Earthquake McGoon”". Check-Six.com. Retrieved 2012-06-28.

      “France honors U.S. pilots for Dien Bien Phu role”. Agence France Presse. 25 February 2005.

      Burns, Robert. “Covert U.S. aviators will get French award for heroism in epic Asian battle”. Associated Press Worldstream. 16 February 2005

      Roy, p. 198

      Fall, p. 306

      Fall, p. 307

      Rottman, p. 8

      Fall, p. 480

      Rottman, p. 9

      Rottman, 10

      Fall, p. 190

      Windrow, p. 673, Note 53

      Pringle, James (1 April 2004). “Au revoir, Dien Bien Phu”. International Herald Tribune. Archived from the original on 8 February 2008. Retrieved 23 February 2008.

      References

      Davidson, Phillip (1988). Vietnam at War: The History, 1946–1975. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-506792-4.

      “Ðiên Biên Phú – The “official and historical site” of the battle”. Archived from the original on 5 December 2006. Retrieved 2006-12-08.

      Fall, Bernard B. (1967). Hell in a Very Small Place. The Siege of Dien Bien Phu. New York: J.B. Lippincott Company. ISBN 0-306-80231-7.

      Forbes, Andrew, and Henley, David: Vietnam Past and Present: The North. Chiang Mai. Cognoscenti Books, 2012. ASIN: B006DCCM9Q.

      Grauwin, Paul-Henri. Doctor at Dien-Bien-Phu. Hutchinson & Co. Publ., London, 1955.

      “INDO-CHINA: The Fall of Dienbienphu”. Time. 1954-05-17.

      Morgan, Ted (2010) Valley of Death: The Tragedy at Dien Bien Phu That Led America Into the Vietnam War Random House: New York

      Navarre, Henri (1958). Agonie de l’Indochine (in French). Paris: Plon. OCLC 23431451.

      Rottman, Gordon L. (2005). Khe Sanh (1967–1968) – Marines battle for Vietnam’s vital hilltop base. Oxford: Osprey Publishing (UK). ISBN 1-84176-863-4.

      Roy, Jules; Baldick, Robert. The Battle of Dienbienphu. New York: Harper & Row. ISBN 0-88184-034-3. OCLC 263986.

      Roy, Jules (2002). The Battle of Dienbienphu. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers. ISBN 0-7867-0958-8.

      Stone, David (2004). Dien Bien Phu. London: Brassey’s UK. ISBN 1-85753-372-0.

      Windrow, Martin (2004). The Last Valley. New York: Da Capo Press. ISBN 0-306-81386-6.

      Windrow, Martin. The French Indochina War 1946–54 (Osprey Publishing, 2013)

      External links

      Wikimedia Commons has media related to Battle of Dien Bien Phu.

      flag Vietnam portal

      War portal

      Dien Bien Phu, official dedicated website

      Memorial-Indochine.org (in English)

      An Analysis of the French Defeat at Dien Bien Phu

      Airlift’s Role at Dien Bien Phu and Khe Sanh

      An interview with Võ Nguyên Giáp

      Battle of Dien Bien Phu at the Wayback Machine (archived December 16, 2007), an article by Bernard B. Fall

      “Dien Bien Phu: A Battle Assessment” by David Pennington

      “Peace” in a Very Small Place: Dien Bien Phu 50 Years Later, an article by Bob Seals

      ANAPI’s official website (National Association of Former POWs in Indochina)

      Vietnam War Bibliography: The End: Dien Bien Phu and the Geneva Conference Last revised November 10, 2015; archive 2004-09-12

      Field Guide to ..Dien Bien Phu for Historians, Wargamers and the More Discerning Type of Tourist by Peter Hunt 2002

      The short film Victory at Dien Bien Phu (1964) is available for free download at the Internet Archive

      Media links

      Newsreels (video)

      (in English) The News Magazine of the Screen (May 1954)

      (in English) U.S. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles on the fall of Dien Bien Phu (May 7th, 1954)

      (in English) Dien Bien Phu Episode From Ten Thousand Day War Documentary on YouTube

      Retrospectives (video)

      (in English) English subtitled (Closed Captions) scene from the “Dien Bien Phu” docudrama by Schoendoerffer (1992)

      (in English) Archive footages of Colonel Sassi and his 2,000 strong Hmong partisans en route to Dien Bien Phu for a rescue mission in April 1954 (2000) on YouTube

      (in French) Archive radio calls between General Cogny & Colonel de Castries (1954) + 2 commented scenes from Schoendoerffer’s docudrama (1992)

      (in French) Testimonial of General Giáp, 50 years after the battle (May 7th, 2004)

      (in French) Testimonial of General Bigeard, 50 years after the battle (May 3rd, 2004)

      (in French) Testimonial of Corporal Schoendoerffer, 50 years after the battle (May 5th, 2004)

      War reports (Picture galleries and captions)

      (in French) The battle of Dien Bien Phu

      [show] v t e

      France French Indochina

      [show] v t e

      Vietnamese independence movement

      Categories: 1954 in French Indochina1954 in VietnamBattles and operations of the First Indochina WarBattles involving FranceBattles involving VietnamBattles involving the French Foreign LegionBattles involving the United StatesConflicts in 1954Dien Bien PhuDien Bien ProvinceVietnamese independence movementMarch 1954 eventsApril 1954 eventsMay 1954 eventsVo Nguyen Giap

      Navigation menu

      TruthPress

      Alerts (0)

      Notices (2)

      TalkSandboxPreferencesBetaWatchlistContributionsLog outArticleTalkReadEdit source

      More

      Search

      Search Wikipedia

      Main page

      Contents

      Featured content

      Current events

      Random article

      Donate to Wikipedia

      Wikipedia store

      Interaction

      Help

      About Wikipedia

      Community portal

      Recent changes

      Contact page

      Tools

      What links here

      Related changes

      Upload file

      Special pages

      Permanent link

      Page information

      Wikidata item

      Cite this page

      Print/export

      Create a book

      Download as PDF

      Printable version

      In other projects

      Wikimedia Commons

      Languages

      Deutsch

      Español

      Français

      한국어

      Italiano

      Русский

      ไทย

      Tiếng Việt

      中文

      38 more

      Edit links

      This page was last edited on 24 April 2018, at 22:30.

      Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. 5 3 2018 12:43 CST © ™ ® marylouclarkson http://www.truthpress.org https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/MoHistory/conversations/newtopic

    • TruthPress.org & Research

      Date: Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:31 PM
      Subject: Public Notice: MightyMo Mel as no association nor affiliation with “Economic War” Charles Stuart nor Carl Lenz
      Please be supportive of Releasing David Roland Hinkson, Political Prisoner

    MOST RECENT
    Load more ...

    SignUp

    Login

    Newsletter

    Email this story
    Email this story

    If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

    If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.