Murder ain't sexy. Those guys had done nothing to deserve the US sending BoomerD to murder them.
theflyingpig
Banned
- Mar 9, 2008
- 5,616
- 18
- 0
Vietnam is the perfect example of a war run by fools. The object of war is to kill the enemy and turn his home to ashes. The enemy should be given the choice of death or surrender, nothing more. The enemy's will to fight must be broken. We failed to do this in Vietnam, probably because we didn't really have a good reason to be there. This is why the fools in charge could not bring themselves to do what was necessary to properly conduct the war. Continued fighting in Vietnam would only have prolonged the inevitable US defeat.
Uh, you need to learn to question the war itself. There was no moral justification for war in Vietnam fought your way, either.
StinkyPinky
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2002
- 6,990
- 1,283
- 126
What are you talking about? Did you never go to school? The US has never lost a war.
Vietnam was a stalemate. Honest! Uncle Sam said so, it must be true.
Vietnam was a stalemate. Honest! Uncle Sam said so, it must be true.
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
2 years? Maybe. 10 years? Absolutely. From a sheerly military perspective, the North Vietnamese had no hope of contending with our resources. They put their money on the depopularization of the American war effort, and that was a winning bet.
I don't know what would've happened if we had won. Vietnam is doing very well these days, and is emerging as a major player in Southeast Asia, much to China's chagrin. We are wise to court them, and we have been.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,610
- 15,006
- 146
I don't look at it as murder Craig...most of them would have gladly killed me if they'd have gotten the first shot. I just took the position that it was my job to ensure that they didn't get that opportunity.
Kill a Commie for your Mommie!
It really pisses me off to see our government opening up trade with Vietnam, when little Cuba, who AFAIK, never killed a single US soldier, remains on the boycott list.
IMO, Vietnam and China BOTH should be on the boycott list...and they are at the top of mine.
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
Agh. Threadjack inbound.
(I cringe at liberals using the word murder. They call soldiers killing soldiers in war time undeserved murder, and call killing one's children the termination of pregnancy. I'm sorry, but either I call it out here, or wait until the next abortion thread, and frankly I don't feel like waiting.)
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,001
- 571
- 126
I understand your sentiment, and respect your service.
I don't know what to think about Cuba, but Vietnam is different. Cuba didn't make the efforts to engage us that Vietnam did post-1975. They worked with us in securing MIA's in 87, and they moved to open diplomacy with us. Cuba and Iran and other folks haven't done that without making us kiss their ass first. Also, it's important to realize that things have changed since then. Vietnam isn't our ideological foe anymore, and they severed connections with the Soviet Union before the end of the cold war. They joined the WTO largely at the US' urging. We need to engage them, both for strategic (ie, counter to China) and ideological reasons.
I don't presume to know anything about what you experienced over there. This is just my opinion.
My fiancee is Vietnamese, so I've been reading alot about it.
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 53,638
- 48,201
- 136
Without major changes to our tactics and strategy 2 more years would have made little difference besides putting more people in the ground and wasting a bunch more money.
Vietnam and China don't get along and their relations have been piss poor ever since the Sino-Viet war. With China on the rise Vietnam realized that they had need of a strategic and economic partner and the US is really the only other game in town that can bring both to the table.
Probably not, no. The problem with such wars is every time you kill one enemy, two of them replace them. It's similar to the problem in Afghanistan today, though I'm hoping we can learn from our past mistakes to overcome that.
Incorrect. They were deathly afraid of the carpet bombing, and in fact, that's what got them to the bargaining table.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,610
- 15,006
- 146
I don't know if we'd have won that war under any circumstances.
The NVA had financial backing from the Soviets along with many Soviet "advisors" including quite a few companies of troops of one kind or another, including Spetznatz.
The NVA had some financial backing from the Chinese, lots of hardware courtesy of the Chinese, and thousands of Chinese troops...I mean advisors. :roll:
IF the people here in the states would have supported the war, and IF the politicians would have let the military fight the war unfettered, (just conventional warfare...no nukes) I believe we MIGHT have, at a minimum, forced Hanoi to accept a divided nation, much like we did with Korea. I do NOT believe we could have ever "won" the war, in a total defeat of the Communists and a "free Vietnam," but that was never the objective anyway. Stopping the spread of Communism was...
Had LBJ been permitted to continue bombing the North, and had Nixon continued the aggressive air campaign, I DO think the war would have ended much differently...and there would be a North Vietnam, a South Vietnam, and (at worst...hopefully) an uneasy truce between the two.
We DID NOT lose the war because our troops wouldn't fight, weren't efficient and effective, we lost the war because of a lack of support here in the USA...and the people caused our politicans to send us to fight with one hand tied behind our back...and (at least partially) blindfolded.
The NVA had financial backing from the Soviets along with many Soviet "advisors" including quite a few companies of troops of one kind or another, including Spetznatz.
The NVA had some financial backing from the Chinese, lots of hardware courtesy of the Chinese, and thousands of Chinese troops...I mean advisors. :roll:
IF the people here in the states would have supported the war, and IF the politicians would have let the military fight the war unfettered, (just conventional warfare...no nukes) I believe we MIGHT have, at a minimum, forced Hanoi to accept a divided nation, much like we did with Korea. I do NOT believe we could have ever "won" the war, in a total defeat of the Communists and a "free Vietnam," but that was never the objective anyway. Stopping the spread of Communism was...
Had LBJ been permitted to continue bombing the North, and had Nixon continued the aggressive air campaign, I DO think the war would have ended much differently...and there would be a North Vietnam, a South Vietnam, and (at worst...hopefully) an uneasy truce between the two.
We DID NOT lose the war because our troops wouldn't fight, weren't efficient and effective, we lost the war because of a lack of support here in the USA...and the people caused our politicans to send us to fight with one hand tied behind our back...and (at least partially) blindfolded.
BeauJangles
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2001
- 13,941
- 1
- 0
Depends, the hippies say no. The US army says yes. The North vietnamess generals say they would have gotten beaten by the US.. The VC says the same... General Giap (prominent leader of the communist) in his memoirs says yes.. Also, if I remember correctly, Ho Chi Min said the same. Jane Fonda whom many Americans look up to for political and military affairs says no.
With all that, who do you want to believe?
"After the war, General Vo Nguyen Giap (Supreme Commander of the Forces of [north] Vietnam), wrote his memoirs. In them, he stated that if it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the U.S. Interviewed in the Time/Life documentary "The Ten Thousand Day War," Giap reiterated this point and gave credit for the Communist victory to the U.S. media and protestors like Jane Fonda and John Kerry. According to Giap, the North Vietnamese government played to our media and helped feed them the propaganda that was splashed across the news in the U.S. and around the world. Propaganda that not only broke down the morale of U.S. soldiers, but boosted the morale of the NVA."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1120059/posts
If people have time, just check out the video "The Ten Thousand Day War" and that interview. I watched it a while back and its very interesting. If people don't know who General Giap is, do a google search.
But yet people still insist on believing people like Jane Fonda.
With all that, who do you want to believe?
"After the war, General Vo Nguyen Giap (Supreme Commander of the Forces of [north] Vietnam), wrote his memoirs. In them, he stated that if it weren't for organizations like Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Hanoi would have surrendered to the U.S. Interviewed in the Time/Life documentary "The Ten Thousand Day War," Giap reiterated this point and gave credit for the Communist victory to the U.S. media and protestors like Jane Fonda and John Kerry. According to Giap, the North Vietnamese government played to our media and helped feed them the propaganda that was splashed across the news in the U.S. and around the world. Propaganda that not only broke down the morale of U.S. soldiers, but boosted the morale of the NVA."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1120059/posts
If people have time, just check out the video "The Ten Thousand Day War" and that interview. I watched it a while back and its very interesting. If people don't know who General Giap is, do a google search.
But yet people still insist on believing people like Jane Fonda.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,610
- 15,006
- 146
I suppose that depends on your political viewpoint.
Would you rather live under Communist rule...or under "democratic" rule?
Would you like to have the choice, or have someone make it for you?
If a divided nation is so bad, should the South Koreans roll over and join the north?
Would a unified Communist Korea be better than the divided nation it is now?
How about North and South Carolina? Should they join together as one larger "Carolina?"
Dont you think South Korea is better off because of the division?
Look, I hate this debate but I think we lost the war when Cronkite got on and said it was unwinnable during the Tet offensive. Public tide turned and the NVA and Viet Cong commanders who were ready to go tits up noticed they could win the public relations war on our home front by keeping the war going. Also without the ability to invade the North it was only a matter of time until we gave up either way. You cant win a war when you cant wipe out your enemy.
So I dont think another 2 years of war would have mattered at all. Except we would have more body bags on both sides of the war.
Stop the spread of communism. I should know because a lot of my friends left SE asia during that time. What is communism? Look up "little red book" "Eastern Europe".. Soviet union... The Cuban missile crises. Massive famines in like Holodomor.. etc.. fun times... It could be argued that because of USA involvement of the Vietnam war. The dominoes did stop. Thailand is next to Vietnam but is not communist.
Yes, because your opinion is so much more important than the actually people who were fighting there -- not only were these people there at the time, but they were on different sides.
Don't stop drinking the koolaide... yea, those hippies who spat on soldiers coming back home.. way to go.. Thanks US MSM!!!
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I suppose that depends on your political viewpoint.
Would you rather live under Communist rule...or under "democratic" rule?
Would you like to have the choice, or have someone make it for you?
If a divided nation is so bad, should the South Koreans roll over and join the north?
Would a unified Communist Korea be better than the divided nation it is now?
How about North and South Carolina? Should they join together as one larger "Carolina?"
I think a united communist Vietnam is probably better. What South Vietnam would have turned into is anyone guess, but given its history and the trend in the region I'm inclined to think more Burma than Germany.
Where in my response did I defend the hippies? I feel many of those people were more despicable than the communists we were fighting.
I don't know where you get your history, but you need to go back to school.
You think General Giap said that we would have lost in his memoirs? Two problems with that, the first problem is that he never said anything of the sort and attributes the victory of the north to the quality of the North's soldiers and the US' lack of understanding of Vietnam. The second problem is that the memoirs you are talking about DON'T EVEN EXIST.
Also Ho Chi Minh died before the end of the Vietnam War, but his most famous quote on the subject is 'You can kill ten of our men for every one we kill of yours, but in the end you will lose and we will win".
So the head of North Vietnam and their biggest general disagree with you, and you've just shown yourself to be reliant upon made up rumors posted on the internet for your knowledge of the Vietnam War.
With all that, who do you want to believe?
EDIT: Edited for extra lulz including the freep link.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter