Talk:Củ Chi tunnels

Name of this article

This page should probably be named "Cu chi tunnels" as this is what it's referred to mostly in Vietnam, and if you do google searches:

• "Tunnels of Cu Chi" - 780 hits
• "Cu chi tunnels" - 9,080 hits

Fuzheado | Talk 02:55, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I have no problems with which naming is used. I kept this article instead of "Cu chi tunnels" as it was considerably more detailed. I think it would take an admin to move it to the other name as the other article (now a redirect) would need first to be deleted.

I changed the article on the Italian wikipedia to point here, so if you move it you should probably revert my change there.

I'm surprised to note in the histories of the two articles that the two experienced Wikipedians User:172 and User:VeryVerily edited both articles without bothering to even put a merge tag on them.-gadfium 04:19, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Name of combatants

A consesus should be made on whether to use NLF or Viet Cong when refering to the anti-american/diem combatants in this article. both have drawbacks and the debate has caused considerable distress to User:172 and User:VeryVerily. not all of these combatants were NLF some were merely peasants protecting their hamlet. On the other hand VC is somewhat derrogatory (although widely used in academic and historical discourse)

As a combat infantry Vietnam veteran myself, I would also point out that the use of NLF is akin to gilding the lily. In addition, I would note that, as in any war, some of the people who were attacking American soldiers were simply criminals taking advantage of the chaos. Finally, I would respectfully suggest that words such as "weary" used to describe Americans are not accurate; we soldiers were weary of fighting not to win, and we would have preferred to go home, but we also would have preferred to have been allowed to win the war first. Had Hanoi been bombed early on, and had Haiphong been mined, and had the media not misinterpreted Tet as a U.S. loss (it was the diametrical opposite), the outcome might have been very different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.154.103 (talk) 03:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I have just been taken round these tunnels by a Vietnamese tour guide who said that during the wars with the French they preferred to be called Viet Minh.

During the American war the US changed the name to Viet Cong during broadcasts as the Viet Minh were regarded as heroes by too many Vietnamese and renaming would degrade them. Viet Cong meaning Vietnamese Communists.

However the name Viet Cong (VC - Victor Charlie) stuck and the Vietnamese now use that name to describe those that fought the US.

Interestingly the pamphlet thing given to visitors (in English and Vietnamese) just states that "The tunnel system embodies the undaunted will, intelligence and pride of the Cu Chi people" and "This was the base of the former leadership and party committee of Cu Chi District......contributing to the national defending resistance against the enemy"

It does not mention the name of this resistance group.118.68.68.212 (talk) 12:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Black echo

Was the term black echo used to describe these tunnels, if so could that page be merged and redirected to this articel?--nixie 22:57, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Page move

I have moved this article to its present location, Cu Chi tunnels. The old redirect to Cu Chi Tunnels (which currently redirects here) that was in its place has been archived to Cu Chi tunnels/Old. It may be necessary to keep it for copyright reasons. jni 09:22, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Identification of gun photo

The image above the caption "Visitors can fire an AK-47 at the shooting range for USD$1 a round" is NOT an AK-47 -- it's an M-16/AR-15. I'm changing the caption to reflect this, but perhaps it should be removed altogether. RBM 10:09, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am the contributor of the photo, which I took while visiting CuChi in 1997. The actual identification of the rifle has been a source of some debate (I don't pretend to know guns), so the issue is nicely sidestepped by simply identifying it as an "assault rifle." However, I think that keeping the photo is warranted, because visitors to CuChi are given the opportunity to shoot on the grounds of the park. Kevyn 18:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

there is vandalism on this page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cu_Chi_tunnels 198.146.89.224 01:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Ben Duoc Temple

At the Ben Dinh Tunnel at Cu Chi there is also a temple called Ben Duoc Temple. Work started on May 19, 1993 and the first stage opened on December 19, 1995. The temple complex consists of a triple porch building, stele hall, nine storey tower about 40m high, and a main hall. In the main hall engraved on the wall are the names of 50,000 Vietnamese who died during the conflict and a bust of Ho Chi Minh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.158.202 (talk) 20:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

'Avenger'

There are some excellent descriptions of the tunnels and warfare within them, in the Frederick Forsyth novel 'Avenger', just in case anyone is interested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.104.25 (talk) 10:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Question

Wonder what would have happened in the vietnam war if the US had been able to use Tallboy and Grand Slam (i.e.: large bunker busting bombs) on the tunnel networks? --204.4.131.140 (talk) 12:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

No title

Removed a sentence about the Vietcong wearing the US soldiers down as it is contra-factual. The Vietcong were all but extinct at the time the US withdrew with the fighting having been taken over by NVA regulars.

the cu chi tunnel is good —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.171.108 (talk) 19:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

the building/digging of the tunnels

The article does not actually mention the building of the tunnels. The way it is written, they may have pre-existed and were just used by the Vietcong. 71.190.72.55 (talk) 15:59, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, construction on these tunnels began in 1948. At that time they were used to defeat the French in the First Indochina War. It is often implied, or inaccurately stated, (Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Củ_Chi_district,_Hồ_Ch%C3%AD_Minh_City) that the tunnels were created to fight American forces. It is clear that the tunnels were used and expanded to that end, but it was not the impetus of their creation. MsMatch13 (talk) 02:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio template

Most of this article seems to have been lifted whole cloth from this page:

http://www.paralumun.com/vietcuchitunnels.htm

Shoplifter (talk) 10:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I think it's the other way around -- the paralumun.com page was lifted whole cloth from the Wikipedia page. If you read the other page, especially the bottom section, "Cu Chi Tunnels Vietnam:", it makes reference to photos that exist only on the Wikipedia page. Example: "Tour Guide showing how the Tunnel works." makes no sense, except as a photo caption.

Much of the contents of the sections on the Wikipedia page, especially the Tourist Destination and Gallery were written by me, when I uploaded my photos (I visited the tunnels in 1997), and it's my own work.

I think that the copyvio template should be removed. Consensus? kevyn (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

You make a good point. Think I'll be Bold and remove it! We still need some references though!! 220.101 talk^\Contribs 14:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Photograph of original tunnel

Part of an original tunnel at Cu Chi

I have a photograph of the inside of the original tunnel at Cu Chi. According to the tour guide this tunnel is unchanged except it is treated with insecticide (he said petrol). Unfortunately, I don't have an external flash for my camera (I rarely use the flash) and the large lens has caused a shadow at the bottom of the picture, so I haven't put it on the article page.

There are some other photos on my website under the same license. M Blissett (talk) 11:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Củ Chi tunnels. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110309010132/http://home.vicnet.net.au/~vvaaeduc/content/Cu%20Chi%20Aust%20Story.html to http://home.vicnet.net.au/~vvaaeduc/content/Cu%20Chi%20Aust%20Story.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110107110800/http://www.cuchitunnel.org.vn/content/index.php?var=3&more=1&lan=1 to http://www.cuchitunnel.org.vn/content/index.php?var=3&more=1&lan=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714182241/http://www.mondesouterrain.fr/_US/Galerie/theme.asp?pre=2480&Rubrique=2719&suiv=3072&Pere=2472 to http://www.mondesouterrain.fr/_US/Galerie/theme.asp?pre=2480&Rubrique=2719&suiv=3072&Pere=2472

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

re: bias

This article is written almost entirely from the perspective of the US/Australian war effort. While obviously a significant perspective, the fact that almost nothing here refers to actual Vietnamese sources on/writings about/perspective on the tunnels makes the overall article quite biased. Given that the historical meaning of the tunnels probably has much more to do with the men and women who spent most time on them, this article should be marked as biased and scheduled for significant revision. I don't have time to do that right now myself, and I'm not suggesting anyone who's worked on it did something wrong, but it is ultimately not a very objective view of an important historical item/moment as the article currently stands. 134.114.101.50 (talk) 00:12, 21 September 2022 (UTC)