This really speaks volumes about how US seems to have been carrying out her foreign policy for so many decades, even up until now - refusing to acknowledge whatever they don't agree with, refusing to engage the party in concern, only for to initiate even more dire consequences. At least partly. What might have transpired instead had this president Wilson dude been willing to hear out HCM's ideas? I'm not saying he has to agree with HCM. Even if two parties don't come to agree in the end, if they're willing to discuss and debate I'm pretty sure there would've been many other things to be gained - more awareness of the other point of view, at least, as to what makes them think the way they do, and if you see it as a problem (although this is subjective), how to handle it. I don't think this Wilson guy might have had such an overwhelming influence on HCM to the point that HCM would've done a 180 degrees turn and switched to advocating for democracy instead, but it might have at least made HCM question his beliefs a little. Or maybe the reverse lol (i.e. HCM making the Wilson dude question his own beliefs). (I know I'm writing this from the point of view that I was communism is a horribly flawed ideology - not that I don't think democracy doesn't have its flaws as well - so I'm sorry if this is offensive to anyone who has communist leanings :x although that seems a little unlikely in this day and age...).
Other historical examples indicate the US tendency to ignore and engage with whatever they don't like. What I can think of at the top of my head now is: Burma/ Myanmar, which became some sort of military state a few decades ago, and all the US wanted to do was dump a bunch of economic sanctions on her in order to condemn and "punish" her. Which obviously did not make the Burmese government change its mind about anything, and probably only served to the disadvantage of the common people. And also the US being upset with ASEAN for accepting Myanmar into its membership. I mean, obviously ASEAN didn't agree with the Myanmar government's domestic policy too, but at least maintaining okay relations with them meant that we could at least possibly work some things out, since they would be more open to whatever ideas he other ASEAN states wanted to bring up. More so than the US, anyway.
Okay, originally I thought of another example, but my memory of what country it is is kinda hazy. So I might get the facts wrong... I was thinking of Pakistan, and of US refusing to engage with the Taliban government around more than 10 years ago because of their human rights record or something, only do being forced to do so now because of circumstances, but after thinking again, it might've been Afghanistan instead... which are 2 completely different countries :x And I'm not too clear about the "circumstances" I mentioned about. Haha my stupid memory.
I was reading this article: http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2013/07/25/obama-americas-founders-inspired-communist-ho-chi-minh/ and one of the comments was talking about how the US/ President Wilson told HCM to "fudge himself" because of his communist leanings and not agree to his request for a talk. And the comment in reply to that was "And why wouldn’t we tell a Communist to go fudge himself?
As to a “pro-West” dictator: Ha! As if Ho wasn’t a dictator in his own right."
:/ I don't agree with Communism either, but ignoring what you don't like - or what you see as a problem - is only going to make things WORSE. Pride is the least important thing to be concerned about here, what the hell.
