Think they supported him when Vietnam invaded, but any support during the civil war would have been dwarfed by the support given to the Khmer Republic. You could say that they opened the door for Pol Pot by weakening Vietnamese factions, but that isn’t really providing support in my opinion.
The reason that Pol Pot is a decent example is because he got a fair amount of support simply for being anti-US (from for example) . The US covertly supporting an anti-US faction to keep their bigger enemies (Vietnam) from becoming more influential doesn’t mean that they were perceived as an ally of the USA (once again, prior to Vietnam invading).
Pol Pot is an alright example. If we go into African “post-colonial” history we also have some wild alliances.
I’d say it is a fair bit more than 90% hit rate though.
deleted by creator
Think they supported him when Vietnam invaded, but any support during the civil war would have been dwarfed by the support given to the Khmer Republic. You could say that they opened the door for Pol Pot by weakening Vietnamese factions, but that isn’t really providing support in my opinion.
The reason that Pol Pot is a decent example is because he got a fair amount of support simply for being anti-US (from
for example) . The US covertly supporting an anti-US faction to keep their bigger enemies (Vietnam) from becoming more influential doesn’t mean that they were perceived as an ally of the USA (once again, prior to Vietnam invading).
The next season of blowback is covering this topic, right?
I think it was more a reverse, they supported him eventually. Once his place as a disruptor for Vietnam was clear
edit: and now this question has me wanting to do a deep dive cause there are for sure other exceptions.