Cambodia thoughts

[Mathos]

For a first hand account of this terrible genocide read First They Killed My Father. Written by a woman that was on the run for years until escaping to Thailand.

Could not put it down.

E. G.

Excellent account E.G. I would recommend two books myself for outstanding reading and information.

Pol Pot

Author Philip Short.

The History of a Nightmare

Pot was the architect of a nightmare. The personal vision he had of a Shangri-La, Utopia was enforced by a period of unbelievable terror. How he even thought of carrying out this madness, let alone trying to consider what he hoped to achieve by the same is beyond any form of normality.

The true number of Cambodians to have perished will probable never be known. At least one million, some claim more likely to be two million.

This was a beautiful land, a land which had suffered through no fault of it's own.

Quote from William Shawcross Daily Telegraph.
'An impressive study - first hand accounts of the destruction, the paranoia, the unspeakable cruelty and the day to day banality of the Khmer Rouge leaders.'


Quote:- Johnathen Mirsky Literary Review.
'A comprehensive and eloquent biography of a monster'


The second book is:-

Daughter of The Killing Fields.

Asrei's Story

Author Theary C Seng

Asrei was a toddler when the Khmer Rouge killed her father. In prison she fell asleep in her mother's arms and woke to find her gone forever.

The book tells how Asrei {Theary Seng} spends her early years passed from one set of relatives to another, amidst a backdrop of soldiers, landmines, inadequate refugee camps and unrelenting death.

Confronted by a sea of human suffering from the age of three, she very soon learned that; ' life is but a breath.'


It's a tonic to the soul to see improvements as are obvious today and the obvious peace and tranquility of a scene like this.

[Mathos]

Oudong Temple a reasonable drive on a motorcycle taxi with Joe was quite an experience.

The two youngsters who guided us around spoke amazingly good English and were keen to learn, they not only gave us a good tour of the area, they never stopped asking questions.



The views were far reaching, but the area of land around Phnom Penh in general is rather flat and not exactly panoramic from a high elevation such as this Temple afforded.






The Monks in general looked extremely yound as well around The Temples in the area.






He kept getting lost.

Not to worry though, we stopped off for water here and there and managed to pick up a bit of fresh fruit to satisfy the appetite.





Oh, yes we needed extra fuel as well.

I kept calling him 'Danny Boy' he reminded me of a crafty 'Mick'

He said he liked the name Danny and may well change his nick name.

[Mathos]

Some of the old Temple ruins are quite spectacular around the capital itself.








When you consider the craftsmanship involved in building and carving with such skill so many years ago, it automatically creates thought and good points for discussion.


I think the picture below go's a long way to emphasising points I raised earlier regarding the appearance, cleanliness and happiness seen in the people in general.





The lady below looked like she wasn't going to have anybody invading her bit of temple either.

I think she resided in there.

[Mathos]

I bet the construction in those days of old was quite a spectacle to behold as well.

There was a great deal of intelligence as well as craftsmanship involved in buildings of this nature, they have to share a platform with those of the Aztecs and Egyptians in my book. Especially Angkor Wat which probable surpasses all of them.







Flobo was enjoying every minute, the people, wanted to show so much and obviously they had an interest in selling her small trinkets and single flowers, candles etc.

[Mathos]

There are numerous pavement cafés in Phnom Penh, all were busy venues and we found it enjoyable to wile away many an hour or two here and there.

There was always somebody about to have a chat with and plenty to talk about too.






Obvious care and trouble had been taken in presentation, again this says a great deal.

[Mathos]

The actual river, The Tonle merges with The Mekong at Phnom Penh (I think I am correct in saying that) shows a great deal of life, people appear to live in house boat type dwellings, obviously they can make a living from the rivers and perhaps they need little or nothing else.

Once again, the areas were hives of activity and people appeared content with their lot.





Not a satellite dish in sight either Jizzy!




The guy/lady hanging over the side of the boat in the rear of the photograph looks to be busy with his/her washing chores.





We had a trip down river on this boat, it was managed by a really nice lady who fed and watered us as part of the trip fee.

[Northern Scum]

I've not seen this thread before & think it's likely the best thread I've ever seen.

Well done, Mathos.

I'm moved.

[EmperorTud]

The best books I have read on the Cambodian genocide are,

Brother Number One, by David Chandler. For an insight into Saloth Sar and the Khmer Rouge. Also useful to understand the different factors involved in his rise to power and the inexplicable paranoia with which he and his colleagues suffered from.

Amazon.com: Brother Number One: A Political Biography Of Pol Pot, Revised Edition: David P Chandler: Books

Surviving the Killing Fields: A Cambodian Odyssey by Haing S. Ngor and Roger Warner. Haing played Dith Pran in The Killing Fields for which he won an Oscar but his own experience under the Khmer Rouge is probably far worse.
This is the best book written by any of the survivors of the genocide IMO. I've pretty much read them all.

Amazon.com: Surviving the Killing Fields: Cambodian Odyssey: Haing S. Ngor,Roger Warner: Books

[Mathos]

I've not seen this thread before & think it's likely the best thread I've ever seen.

Well done, Mathos.

I'm moved.

I think that is the nicest compliment I have ever had.

Thanks very much Shitman, I'll try and keep it going in the same vein, I have some brilliant photographs and writing to put up on here over the coming days and weeks.

Thanks again mate.

[Mathos]

The best books I have read on the Cambodian genocide are,

Brother Number One, by David Chandler. For an insight into Saloth Sar and the Khmer Rouge. Also useful to understand the different factors involved in his rise to power and the inexplicable paranoia with which he and his colleagues suffered from.

Amazon.com: Brother Number One: A Political Biography Of Pol Pot, Revised Edition: David P Chandler: Books

Surviving the Killing Fields: A Cambodian Odyssey by Haing S. Ngor and Roger Warner. Haing played Dith Pran in The Killing Fields for which he won an Oscar but his own experience under the Khmer Rouge is probably far worse.
This is the best book written by any of the survivors of the genocide IMO. I've pretty much read them all.

Amazon.com: Surviving the Killing Fields: Cambodian Odyssey: Haing S. Ngor,Roger Warner: Books

I'll have a look at those EmperorTud. Thanks for the tip mate, it's nice of you too.

[jizzybloke]

Please do keep going Mathos!

[Mathos]

I 'll try and do some more on here tomorrow, I want to head towards Siem Reip and Tonle Sap Lake plus of course Angkor Wat.

They are both incredibly interesting places.


Flobo and myself are extremely lucky to be able to travel about as much as we have been able to do, since our kids grew up and went their merry ways in life.

They didn't go so far either which is great, because we see them most days and have the added bonus of five fantastic grandsons.

We enjoy our travels and every now and then they allow us to take one or as this last time two of the lads along with us.

Great fun it is too.

Anyhow, what I was going to mention was a young lad we came across on Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia last year.

You know in the western world, if you need an ambulance for instance it's normally a rapid phone call and one is there within minutes. In the UK the 999 service is outstanding.

There is a natural human tendency to take such benefits for granted.

The young lad I want to tell you about lives on Tonle Sap Lake, he was swimming in the lake and there was an accident, his left arm was severed right off by the propeller blade on a long tail boat.

You can imagine the pain, the shock, the loss of blood, the terror..

As it was the people got him out fast and he was lucky enough and young enough to survive this terrible incident and live.

I don't suppose he ever received counseling or such like.

No.

He has to provide for himself and there is no benefit system on The Tonle Sap Lake.

He sells bananas or begs from an aluminium tub.

He propels that tub about with a little paddle and he can fair make it move, it's important that he gets to a prospective customer for instance before any other vendor does.

He doesn't feel one bit sorry for himself either.





I just thought he was one hell of a kid and wanted to mention him.

[chinthee]

This is indeed a fascinating thread Mathos. There are many elements of your political observations and conclusions that could be debated extensively elsewhere on the forum.

But as a contiguous travel thread with extensive political and historical background, it is unique and very well done. I too look forward to more.

[Mathos]

This is indeed a fascinating thread Mathos. There are many elements of your political observations and conclusions that could be debated extensively elsewhere on the forum.

But as a contiguous travel thread with extensive political and historical background, it is unique and very well done. I too look forward to more.

Your comments are much appreciated Chinthee.

Thank you.

I am pushed for time this evening and have had a busy day. A hard week to look forward to, but I like it that way.

One of my daughters and her husband have a franchise business. Daughter had to have an operation a week ago Friday, she's doing OK but will be 'out of order' for a few weeks. Consequently I'm doing the morning and afternoon school runs for her. She is normally hands on at work with her hubby, so I'm helping him a little as well as keeping on top of my own work.

It's the joys of being a dad I reckon.

Anyhow I have quite a bit of writing up to do from my notes that I intended doing this evening but simply have not had the time to prepare the same.

As it is I'll do it asap in the meantime I thought I would add a few pictures, just to keep the ball rolling so to speak.

I think I mentioned earlier in one of the posts, the photographs (some of them )are really great, but they need to be viewed in full screen mode to get the best out of them. So if you right click on them save them to your photograph manager and view them in that mode they really do take on a brilliant meaning.


The weather has been superb in the UK today!

I'd just like to comment on the horrendous scenes coming from Burma too.

It appears that the death toll is going to go through the roof here. There is a terrible neglect of just about everything regarding the needs of the people too in this country.

__________________________________________________ _______

The lady below had some terrible tales to tell of the suffering she had seen and undergone at the hands of The Khmer Rouge.

She spoke of being beaten, raped, and generally abused. Being forced to work in the fields, sleep and eat in the fields. She had seen loved ones, friends and associates taken away, never to be seen again.



She appeared to be allowed to live within the confines of the old ruins. It must have been like a palace to her.


The kids on these boats absolutely amaze me, they are little more than toddlers at times, but they run about and jump around the small decks, the danger levels are ridiculously high, but in general they cope fantastically.





I think the photographs give a wealth of information in their own presentation of that click of the shutter and the frame is there for ever so to speak.
This particular one relates how you wish to see it from life on the river to the river bank, the levels of safety and protection from the monsoon river levels. Flimsy, but no doubt effective.




So much more going on here, the communications, the fishing, the various homes of different builds and materials, the designs and construction of the boats.
What a view has been considered from the home with the open veranda.





This next one and full screen especially says so much, I don't even think anything I could say regarding the same could do it justice.

It's superb.

[sunderlandstephen]

It has been said that the USA used Cambodia as a testing ground for the development of bombs.

Recording tape units were placed into the bomb housings to record their destructive capabilities.

Donald Dawson, was the pilot who was eventually court martialled for his refusal to go on any further raids involving dropping bombs on the civilian population of Cambodia.


Many a time I give thought to how America was obsessed with Communism, the fear of Communism and their involvement with bringing the spreading communism to a full stop. I wonder strongly if the untimely death of Jack Kennedy thrust too much power into the wrong hands. Kissinger, L B Johnson and Nixon. I would like to think Kennedy would have been more visual in his position and would not have allowed the Americans to become involved in such lunacy as they did.

We will never know of course.

Do you know the outcome of Dawsons court martial

[sunderlandstephen]

However, they very sadly neglected the education for the Cambodians and the levels of the same are still extremely poor up to this day.

Things are definitely improving though, and there are an increasing number of Cambodians who are getting educated. Not only that, they actually value the education for the knowledge it gives rather than a piece of paper, unlike most Thais.

The Cambodian people struck me as very eager to learn and help themselves to a better future.Every body has the right to an education,the west beats the east on that one.

[sunderlandstephen]

Very good thread. Researched same subject before visiting Phnom Phen last year.
Not pleasant reading
Had also read travelers reviews of Tuol Sleng , but the sight of the divded cells there still sent a shiver down the spine,might sound dramatic but you could almost feel the fear.

[Mathos]

It has been said that the USA used Cambodia as a testing ground for the development of bombs.

Recording tape units were placed into the bomb housings to record their destructive capabilities.

Donald Dawson, was the pilot who was eventually court martialled for his refusal to go on any further raids involving dropping bombs on the civilian population of Cambodia.


Many a time I give thought to how America was obsessed with Communism, the fear of Communism and their involvement with bringing the spreading communism to a full stop. I wonder strongly if the untimely death of Jack Kennedy thrust too much power into the wrong hands. Kissinger, L B Johnson and Nixon. I would like to think Kennedy would have been more visual in his position and would not have allowed the Americans to become involved in such lunacy as they did.

We will never know of course.

Do you know the outcome of Dawsons court martial

Air University Review, July-August 1976
The Air Force, the Courts, and the
Controversial Bombing of Cambodia

First Lieutenant Stephen M. Millett

In the summer of 1973 a strange episode in the history of the Air Force took place. Under orders of the President, the Air Force was engaged in the bombing of Communist positions in Cambodia in support of the tottering war effort of the Lon Nol government in Pnompenh. Congress, in opposition to the President's policy, tacked onto an appropriation bill of 1 July 1973 a section that would cut off funds for this operation by 15 August. In the meantime, a federal district judge in Brooklyn issued an unprecedented injunction to halt the bombing immediately. These events touched off a major legal and constitutional struggle with profound political and military implications. A review of this case sheds considerable light on the perplexing constitutional problems of the whole American military involvement in Southeast Asia, which is still of considerable interest.the initial suit
Before 1973 there had been numerous attempts by opponents of the war in Southeast Asia to bring the constitutional and legal aspects of the war into federal courts. Their objective apparently was to prod the national judiciary into interposing itself in the public controversy over American military involvement in South Vietnam. All these earlier attempts had failed, however, since the courts consistently refused to hear such cases because of their essentially political and military nature.1
The federal court suit to stop the bombing of Cambodia was filed on 13 April 1973, by Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman (D, New York) and four Air Force officers: Captain Michael Flugger of New York City, Captain James H. Strain of Oklahoma, Captain Donald E. Dawson of Connecticut, and First Lieutenant Arthur Watson of Rome, New York. The first three were B-52 pilots who were not at that time flying missions over Cambodia. Captain Dawson had a personal interest in the suit in which he hoped the federal courts would rule that the bombings of Cambodia were illegal; he was facing court-martial proceedings in June for refusing an order to fly a B-52 mission over Cambodia. Two of the other officers had been grounded for similar reasons.2
The suit was brought before federal district court Judge Orrin C. Judd of Brooklyn. Judge Judd, a Republican appointed to the bench by President Johnson in 1968, had refused on an earlier occasion to rule on a similar case. But on 13 June 1973 he granted the motion of the plaintiffs for a summary judgment and dismissed the motion of the government attorneys to dismiss the case because the plaintiffs had no legal standing to present their suit.3
The attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union who were handling the case for Congresswoman Holtzman and the Air Force officers argued that the bombings were unconstitutional since Congress had never given authorization for them. They further contended that the Air Force missions over Cambodia constituted a new military operation, even the initiation of a new war, in light of the Southeast Asian cease--fire agreement of 29 January1973. The government attorneys argued on the other hand that the Cambodian operations were merely a continuation of the larger war in Southeast Asia and thereby legal in light of congressional appropriations for the American military effort in Southeast Asia.4
Judge Judd delivered his opinion on the Cambodian bombing case on Wednesday, 25 July 1973. "The question here," he decided," is not one posed by the Government whether aerial action in Cambodia is the termination of a continuing war or the initiation of a new and distinct war but whether Congress has authorized bombing in Cambodia after the withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam and the release of prisoners of war." The basis of his opinion was that Congress had given no explicit authority for continued American military activity in Southeast Asia after the cease-fire agreement of 24 January 1973. The judge's conclusion was that the President had given an unconstitutional order to continue the bombing of Cambodia. Therefore, he issued an injunction to end the Air Force operations over that country, effective at 1600 on Friday, 27 July.5
the political compromiseCongress had already taken action in the bombing controversy before Judge Judd issued his injunction. There had been great indignation and apprehension on Capitol Hill that the continued bombing of Cambodia would jeopardize the long-awaited truce agreement of the preceding January. There was also growing distrust of President Nixon's political wisdom in both foreign and domestic affairs. For several years congressmen had criticized the White House for its alleged usurpation of war powers by its management of the war in Vietnam. Furthermore, the Watergate scandal had surfaced in April. Congressional suspicions of White House evildoings seemed to be greatly reinforced by public disclosure of covert espionage at home and secret bombings abroad.
The war in Cambodia had continued even after the American agreement with the North Vietnamese to end their hostilities in South Vietnam. It is true that the domestic political situation in Pnompenh was different from that in Saigon, yet the turmoil in Cambodia had been inseparably intertwined with the war in Vietnam since the spring of 1970, if not earlier. There had been no political agreement on Cambodia formulated in January, only a mutual pledge by the United States and North Vietnam to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and "neutrality" of Cambodia. They did agree to "put an end to all military activities in Cambodia and Laos, totally withdraw from and refrain from re-introducing into these two countries troops, military advisors, and military personnel, armaments munitions and war material."6
The United States continued its aerial combat role over Cambodia as the battles between the Lon Nol government and the Communist Khmer Rouge continued. It is estimated that the Air Force dropped 140,000 tons of ordnance over Cambodia from March though May of 1973. Then, on 30 June, the Communists launched a massive offensive in order to isolate the capital from the sea. President Nixon authorized a step-up in American bombing to break the impact of that offensive. Fighter bombers from Thailand conducted over 200 missions a day, and B-52s from Thailand and Guam flew some 40 missions a day over Cambodia.7
Congressional opposition to President Nixon's policy intensified during May and June. Henry Kissinger met with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in secret to inform its members of the negotiations that were underway to reach a cease-fire in Cambodia. The administration apparently believed that the bombing was vital, both as a military measure to halt Communist gains in the field and as a diplomatic lever in the intensified negotiations, especially with Peking. Congress, however, saw the situation in a different light. It passed an appropriation bill that would have immediately cut off funds for the Cambodian bombings. President Nixon vetoed this on Wednesday, 27 June, and the House failed to override the veto by 35 votes.8
Then came the Communist offensive on Friday which threatened to cut off Pnompenh. On the same day the White House appealed to Congress not to oppose the bombings for six weeks more, pending negotiations. House Minority Leader Gerald Ford (R, Michigan) announced that the President would accept a compromise to halt Air Force operations by 15 August. It was a true political compromise since neither the White House nor Congress was pleased with it. One congressman objected that the compromise date would implicitly mean congressional authorization of a military strategy that it had never endorsed. Yet Senator Hubert Humphrey (D, Minnesota) correctly observed that "no matter how much we pontificate, we do not have the votes to end this war without some agreement with the man in the White House."9
On 1 July both houses of Congress passed the Second Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1973 and the Continuing Appropriations Act of 1974. Each bill contained the provision that no funds were to be used for American military operations in or above North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia on or after 15 August 1973. For the first time since the American military buildup in South Vietnam in 1965, Congress resolved to trim the President's powers as Commander in Chief by denying him the money for military activities. President Nixon signed the two appropriation acts, and his aides informed congressmen that he would terminate the bombings on 15 August.10
war of appeals and writsOn 27 July, the day Judge Judd's injunction was to take effect, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held oral argumentation on whether to lift the injunction. It unanimously granted a stay of injunction, which allowed the Air Force to continue its operations pending appeal of Judge Judd's decision by government attorneys. The lawyers for the plaintiffs appealed immediately to Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall of the United States Supreme Court to reinstate the injunction. Since the Supreme Court was in summer recess, Justice Marshall himself held a hearing on the matter in Washington, D.C. On Wednesday, 1 August, he decided that he would not lift the stay imposed by the Court of Appeals.11
On the night of 1 August, attorney Norman Siegel of the American Civil Liberties Union flew from Washington, D.C., to Seattle, and then drove 145 miles to the summer retreat of Justice William O. Douglas at Goose Prairie, Washington. Justice Douglas agreed to hear the appeal to reinstate the injunction on Friday at the nearby town of Yakima. He heard oral argumentation on that day and wrote a short opinion, which was released publicly on Saturday morning in Washington, D.C.12
In an astonishing opinion, Justice Douglas reversed his colleague's decision and granted an injunction to stop the Cambodian bombing eleven days before the deadline date of 15 August. He viewed this matter as a capital case and granted the injunction as though it were a stay of execution for a condemned man sentenced to death by the domestic criminal court. "When a stay in a capital case is before us, we do not rule on guilt or innocence," he observed. "By the same token, I do not sit today to determine whether the bombing of Cambodia is constitutional. . . . Denial of the application before me would catapult our airmen as well as Cambodian peasants into the death zone."13
Yet it was clear that Justice Douglas had acted on his personal conviction that the Cambodian operation was improper if not illegal and immoral. In reference to the famous steel seizure case of 1952, he wrote that "if Truman could not seize it [property] in violation of the Constitution, I do not see how any president can take 'life' in violation of the Constitution."14 He also made mention in the same opinion to "our Cambodian caper." Nearly two months later, Justice Douglas made a speech at Middle-town, Ohio, in which he warned that the greatest threat to American society was the "spectre of the so--called presidential war." He further asserted that "if we can stand by and let the presidential war be the accepted standard for military activity . . . I fear the country is doomed."15
Justice Douglas's injunction lasted just six hours and ten minutes. Immediately after his opinion became public, the Deputy Solicitor General applied for a new stay of the injunction to Chief Justice Warren Burger, who in turn referred the motion to Justice Marshall. Marshall telephoned all the other justices for their advice, and at 1500 he stayed Douglas's injunction on procedural ground. It was obvious that Justice Marshall had had the support of his colleagues from the beginning of the matter, whereas Douglas had acted only on his own convictions. Meanwhile, the Chief Justice refused to reconvene the entire Court to hear the case on its merits.16
As though the weekend legal battles were not extraordinary enough, new developments on Monday added greater public interest to the case. The Pentagon announced on Monday that B-52s had accidentally bombed a village south of Pnompenh and had killed more than 300 Cambodian civilians--exactly what Justice Douglas had feared might happen. It also became public at this time that the administration had ordered the secret bombing of Cambodia in 1969-1970, which had cost about$1.5 billion, unbeknown to Congress and the public.court of appeals decision
Three circuit court of appeals judges heard the oral argumentation of the case on Wednesday, 8 August. On the same day they announced their decision (2-1 vote) to reverse Judd's opinion. Judge Mulligan ruled that the courts had no authority to hear this case in the first place because it involved diplomatic policy and military strategy, which are by nature political rather than judicial questions. He rejected the argument that there had been no congressional support for the bombing policy: the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, selective service acts, and appropriation bills had all implied support of Presidential policy in Southeast Asia. Mulligan further emphasized that the acts that called for the 15 August deadline of bombing implicitly condoned bombing before that date, which was the precise compromise between the White House and the Hill on this question. Finally, he ruled that Congresswoman Holtzman and the Air Force officers did not have legal standing to bring the case before federal courts.17
On 16 April 1974, the Supreme Court unanimously decided not to review the Cambodian bombing case. The only reason given was that it raised essentially political rather than judicial questions. Be that as it may, it was a moot case. The bombing did end on 15 August 1973, proving that political compromise had been far more effective in changing policy than judicial action.18
the War Powers ActThe political epilogue of the Cambodian bombing case was the enactment of the War Powers Act (Javits bill). The House of Representatives passed its version of the Bill on 18 July 1973, and the Senate passed another version two days later. A Conference Committee agreed on a compromise text, which was sent to the White House. President Nixon vetoed it on 24 October, as anticipated. But surprisingly, both chambers passed the bill again over the veto, by a vote of 75-18 in the Senate and 284-135 in the House. It was the first of nine Presidential vetoes that were overridden by Congress in 1973, which further indicated the eroding political power of the Nixon administration in face of the explosive Watergate scandal.19
The War Powers Act requires that the President notify the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate within 48 hours after he has ordered American armed services into a combat or imminent hostile situation abroad. If Congress does not expressly authorize this action within 60 days, the President must withdraw all forces. Congress is to grant its approval by a declaration of war or a specific legislative act; implicit approval is not to be assumed based on unspecific appropriation bills, ratified treaties which do not specify American military commitments, or other general acts. If Congress disapproves of the President's actions, the act empowers Congress to pass a concurrent resolution (which would not be subject to veto) to withdraw forces engaged in hostilities overseas before the 60-day deadline.20
There has already been a debate among legal scholars on the constitutionality of the War Powers Act.21 But the crux of the issue concerning the scope of the President's powers as Commander in Chief is not as much constitutional as political. President Johnson was able to implement his Vietnam policy not primarily because of the inherent powers of his office but rather because of his political strengths in Congress.
Even though the public unpopularity of the Vietnam war effort cost him the great influence he once enjoyed with Congress in the mid-1960s, President Johnson could always count on a majority of each house to pass the appropriation and draft laws required to implement his policy.
President Nixon enjoyed much of this same authority until 1973. The election of 1972 appeared to be an overwhelming mandate of the people for Nixon to complete his Vietnam-negotiated settlement, especially in light of the outspoken views on this policy by Senator George McGovern. The Deputy Assistant Secretary of State put this fact bluntly in March 1974 when asked to rationalize the continued bombing of Cambodia: "The justification is the reelection of President Nixon."22 What undermined Nixon's second administration was not a foreign policy or military strategy, but a domestic political crisis. This became evident in July 1974 when the House Judiciary Committee (of which Congresswoman Holtzman is a member) voted to impeach the President on three articles alleging domestic abuses of power but rejected an article of impeachment for the secret bombing of Cambodia.
Whether the War Powers Act is constitutional or not may be settled by the courts in the years to come. Probably the courts will try to avoid a case that will place definitive boundaries on the President's diplomatic and military powers, just as they have in the last few years. Politically, however, it would seem wise for the time being for President Ford to conform to the stipulations of the War Powers Act. If, however, he should ever face a direct conflict between his constitutional responsibility to defend the United States itself and its unquestionable foreign interests and the War Powers Act, he must act according to the former and let the lawyers battle out the latter in the courts after the crisis has passed.
There are several lessons to be drawn from the Cambodian bombing case for the armed forces in general and for the Air Force in particular. At the highest level of command, diplomatic policy as well as the military strategy that flows from it is a political matter, not judicial. Litigation attempts to interfere with that policy have been consistently unsuccessful. The ultimate authority of the President lies in his constitutional duties as the Commander in Chief and Head of State. The authority of Congress rests in its legislative powers to declare war and raise, equip, and finance the armed services.
For the Air Force officer, the Cambodian bombing case raises the spectre of individual doubts whether to execute an order the legality of which may be in question. If an officer goes beyond an order in an illegal manner, he can be held personally accountable for his actions before a court-martial. On the other hand, if an officer refuses to carry out an order because of personal judgment and the order is determined later to have been legal, he may be held personally accountable for his inaction before a court-martial.
The Cambodian bombing case helps to resolve this dilemma of the Air Force officer. When an officer receives an assignment from superiors who are clearly executing the policy of the President and the Department of Defense, he must presume that it is legal. If there is doubt, the officer could consult the local Judge Advocate General's office; but of course this will not always be practical or possible, especially in a combat environment. Yet if the order appears illegal or inconsistent with Air Force policy, the officer may decide not to execute it. But he must be very confident of his own judgment and rely on an inner reserve of intelligence and courage.Air Force Institute of Technology
Notes1. Mitchell v. United States, 386 U. S. 972 (1967); Mora v. McNamara, 389 U. S. 934 (1967); Massachusetts v. Laird, 400 U. S. 886 (1970); DaCoasta v. Laird, 448 F.2d 1368, 405 U. S. 979 (1972).
2. New York Times, July 26, 1973, p. 4; New York Times, April 16, 1974, p. 10.
3. Holtzman v. Richardson, 361 F. Supp. 544 (June 13, 1973).
4. New York Times, July 26, 1973, p. 1; Time, August 13, 1973, p. 7.
5. Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 361 F. Supp. 553 (July 25, 1973); New York Times, July 26, 1973, pp. 1, 4; quote on p. 4.
6. "Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam," Department of State Bulletin, February 12, 1973, p. 173.
7. New York Times, July 1, 1973, pp. 1, 3, E4; U. S. News & World Report, July 16, 1973, pp. 52-53.
8. New York Times, July 1, 1973, pp. 52-53.
9. Ibid., p. E4.
10. U. S. Code, Congressional and Administrative News, 93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973, I, 149-53; Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Imperial Presidency (Boston, 1973), pp. 196-98, 256, 293.
11. Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 484 F.2d 1307 (August 8, 1973), p. 1308; New York Times, July 29, 1973, p. l9.
12. Time, August 13, 1967, p. 7.
13. Text of Justice Douglas’s opinion in New York Times, August 5, 1973, p. 2.
14. Ibid.
15. Dayton (Ohio) Daily News, September 29, 1973, p. 2.
16. New York Times, August 5, 1973, pp. 1, 3.
17. Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 484 F.2d 1307 (August 8, 1973), pp. 1308-15.
18. New York Times, April 16, 1974, p. 10; United States Law Week, Supreme Court Proceedings, 42: 3577 (April 16, 1974).
19. U. S. News & World Report, November 19, 1973, p. 91; New York Times, July 22, 1973, p. E3.
20. U. S. Code, Congressional and Administrative News, 93rd Congress, 1st Session, 1973, I, 614-19, and II, 2346-67.
21. Eugene V. Rostow, "Great Cases Make Bad Law: the War Powers Act," 50 Texas Law Review 833 (1972) and Raoul Berger, "War-Making by the President," 121 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 29 (1972).
22. Quoted by Schlesinger, The Imperial Presidency, p. 198.

Contributor

Lieutenant Stephen M. Millett (Ph.D., Ohio State University) is an assistant professor of humanities, School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology. He has published five articles and is the author of A Selected Bibliography of American Constitutional History. His primary interests concern the interaction of domestic institutions with military and foreign policy.
Disclaimer
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.

Air & Space Power Home Page

[Mathos]

The Toul Sleng prison was re-opened as a historical museum memorialising the actions of The Khmer Rouge and receives on average some five hundred visitors every day.

The photograph below is one taken of a prisoner, a young lady and I thought it applicable to use the same as an illustration.

Upon arrival at the prison all prisoners were photographed and expected to give a fully detailed biography. This had to commence from their childhood and finish at the time of their arrest.

They then had to remove all clothing except the basics of underwear.and all possessions were taken from them.

Everything!

They were taken to cells. Some in the larger cells would be shackled to long pieces of iron bar, in the smaller cells they would be fastened to the floor, walls or even the ceiling.
Prisoners, like the lady here were made to sleep without the comfort of mats or blankets, let alone mosquito nets.

Their heads were faced in opposite directions and they were not allowed to talk to each other.






At 4.30 every morning they were awoken and made to strip totally for inspection.

They were given small buckets and told to toilet themselves, if they did not they would be severely punished.

They were checked over and inspected thoroughly for any objects the guards considered it may have been possible for them to have discovered and hid on their person.

They would receive four spoonfuls of watery rice porridge and watery leaf soup, twice a day.
They would be severely beaten if they drank water without the guards permission.

They were hosed down every four days.

At times they were forced to eat human feces and drink urine.

Skin diseases broke out due to the unhygienic conditions they were forced to exist in.

The medical staff were untrained and would offer treatment only if ordered to, to a prisoner who was injured following intense beatings for interrogation purposes. Within two or three days of arriving at the prison they would be interrogated.

Most prisoners were held for up to three months. The torture system was designed to make them confess to their captors to whatever crime they were charged with. They were routinely thrashed and tortured with electric shocks, hot metal instruments, hanging, and several other devices used to administer horrendous pain, and subsequent terror.
eg pulling out fingernails, teeth etc. holding their heads under water, water boarding.

Women were raped and terribly abused. Rape was considered to be against Democratic Kampuchea policy and perpetrators would be executed if found out committing this crime.. They say!

The prisoners had to describe their backgrounds and crimes against the state.

At the finalisation they would give names of friends, colleagues, and acquaintances who were also deemed to be traitors.

People whose names were in the confessions were also brought in for subsequent
interrogation.

One a young Englishman called John Dawson Dewhirst arrested in August 1978 claimed to have been a CIA agent from 12 years of age.

When they ran out of burial spaces in the prison grounds, the prisoners were taken to Choeung Ek extermination centre and beaten or hacked to death with iron bars, pick axes, machetes and other handy instruments. The Khmer Rouge were not to waste bullets on them.

Fewer than twelve people survived the prison out of some known 14,000 who were taken there.

The Khmer Rouge kept meticulous records of their action and prisoners. Children as young as 3 or 4 years of age were taken there and murdered.

There were of course NUMEROUS other prisons scattered across the country.

Many of the older Cambodians will not talk about these events. Little is taught about the same to the young.

Tight lips is apparently the mode of the present day and this results in confusion from the younger generation.

Cambodians still live with caution aggravated by an inner fear.

It is no surprise to me.

[streeteats]

After a very long wait, the heads of the Khmer Rouge our finally facing a trial as this is written. Can a country like Cambodia deliver justice? We hafto hope so.

[Mathos]

After a very long wait, the heads of the Khmer Rouge our finally facing a trial as this is written. Can a country like Cambodia deliver justice? We hafto hope so.

I doubt it very much Streeteats.

Apparently there are thousands of these criminals, rapists, torturers and murderers, living normal lives across the country, most of them settled down to normal lives with families of their own now.

There are only a few of the hierarchy to go on trial Comrade Duch and one or two others, if they are deemed fit enough. they are so old they will probably be dead before any conclusion is reached.


Confusion grows with time, and Cambodia's genocide continues to fracture this country.

[Mathos]

I will be doing some additional posts on here over the coming weekend.

[Mathos]

I thought I would let you have sight of a few photographs from Phnom Penh and surrounding areas before moving to Siem Reap, Tonle Sap Lake and Angkor Wat.

I have quite a bit to prepare for entry on this really fascinating and interesting part of Cambodia.


Hopefully I will get going on it during the course of the coming week.


One night in Phnom Penh, as I mentioned earlier, we felt no problems in being out at night, nothing like a few years since when it was an extremely dangerous place to be night and day at times.





It sure looked a long drawn out exercise to get a decent sized vehicle filled up with motor fuel.




There was a decent assortment of goods for sale at this petrol outlet with combined convenience store.

It reminded me of a Shell Select Site.

[Mathos]

I might just get round to telling you about this critter, one day.



I rather think this stretch of river had been running high in the wet season too.





I must admit to having this part of my existence which looks at people of an age when the atrocities were being carried out and wondering if they played a part in any of it.

I think it is on account of the fact that many of the 'older' Cambodians do have a tendency not to look you in the eyes.

[Mathos]

It's nice to see people taking care of dogs as pets should be, that is a further sign of normality in a country if you place it on a par with the occidental world especially. In Vietnam, they still prefer them on toast or served up with rice along with other peculiar (to us) eating habits.

Still, The French eat horses and snails I understand.

Muslims and Jews abhor pork and I just love a bacon butty!

It takes all kinds, we are a strange lot of assorted beings on this planet.