With the attitudes some people have in Iraq I wonder if some people still feel we should have kept fighting in Vietnam (or widened the war or whatever). I always assumed most people thought it was a disaster. Even McNamara admits it. What's your position?
Poll: Does anyone still think Vietnam was a good idea?
- Thread starter Infohawk
- Start date
If we had applied our strategy differently, then yes it would have been a success just like Korea.
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
If they want to be communist, by all means, let them be communists, people for the most part in rural vietnam probably would not have had a much differant life than if they were living under saigon's puppet government versus a soviet backed communist dictatorship. People in the cities would have been better off under saigon, but for the bulk of the population, it would have not mattered either way. They were not a threat to us back then, and they are not today, even tho they are a communist country now. I fail to see why we were there in the first place.
GoPackGo
Diamond Member
- Oct 10, 2003
- 6,518
- 592
- 126
First off...This is not jungle war fare.
Second...we never removed the communist government from Vietnam.
Third...Its only been 1 and 1/2 years since we went in full boar.
Our soldiers are their. Our soldiers have sacrificed their lives.
We must not allow the misson to build a peaceful government to fail.
You may not like or support war....but can anyone in good conscience want our soldiers to fail in their mission?
The US also owes it to the Iraqi people not to fail.
Second...we never removed the communist government from Vietnam.
Third...Its only been 1 and 1/2 years since we went in full boar.
Our soldiers are their. Our soldiers have sacrificed their lives.
We must not allow the misson to build a peaceful government to fail.
You may not like or support war....but can anyone in good conscience want our soldiers to fail in their mission?
The US also owes it to the Iraqi people not to fail.
I was going to make my own thread, but I saw this so I'll just post what I wanted to ask:
How many U.S soldiers do you think will die before we finally pull out of Iraq? Is this going to be another vietnam? The headlines for today are crazy .. 5 soldiers killed by a bomb, 2 helicopters crash, church bombings, etc..
How many U.S soldiers do you think will die before we finally pull out of Iraq? Is this going to be another vietnam? The headlines for today are crazy .. 5 soldiers killed by a bomb, 2 helicopters crash, church bombings, etc..
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
MidasKnight
Diamond Member
- Apr 24, 2004
- 3,288
- 0
- 76
We were in Vietnam much much much longer than we have been in Iraq. Given the same length of time as Vietnam, the casualties will be very comparable.
I can't find it on Google. If anyone can find a year to year Vietnam death toll chart that would help. I remember seeing it before and it started off like Iraq and then all of a sudden it started to double, then 3x and it kept going up each year till we finally pulled out.
GoPackGo
Diamond Member
- Oct 10, 2003
- 6,518
- 592
- 126
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
Well first you would have to know what Vietnam was about, The first soldier I killed in Nam was a soviet troop, We also fought the chinese, Do I think we were right, I didn't care one way or the other when I got their, I was a soldier and it was my job. After I was their a while and saw first hand, Yes I think we should have been their and we should have got the chance to do our job
Both wars were unpopular and generated a lot of protests.
Both wars were fought against ideological enemies, the image of which was heavily exploited by right-wing administrations in ways that gave rise to accusations of distortions and propaganda.
During both wars there was a trend on the part of right-wing administrations to supress dissent regarding the propriety of the war.
Both wars involved right-wing aministrations whose agenda included strengthening the power of the executive branch.
Both wars were fought against enemies who did not adhere to the recognized rules of engagement.
Both war efforts bogged down and became quagmires, at least partially as a result of opposition from paramilitary forces.
And I'm just getting warmed up.
Both wars were fought against ideological enemies, the image of which was heavily exploited by right-wing administrations in ways that gave rise to accusations of distortions and propaganda.
During both wars there was a trend on the part of right-wing administrations to supress dissent regarding the propriety of the war.
Both wars involved right-wing aministrations whose agenda included strengthening the power of the executive branch.
Both wars were fought against enemies who did not adhere to the recognized rules of engagement.
Both war efforts bogged down and became quagmires, at least partially as a result of opposition from paramilitary forces.
And I'm just getting warmed up.
Here is how the Vietnam war started and it is compared to Iraq.
http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war.gif
Guess time can only tell
By the way, I don't know much about Vietnam. Educate me if you think that chart can't be compared to Iraq.
http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war.gif
Guess time can only tell
By the way, I don't know much about Vietnam. Educate me if you think that chart can't be compared to Iraq.
First off... that's just a matter of terrain. Urban warfare can be just as deadly as Jungle warfare.
Second... the US is propping up a puppet governement like they did in Vietnam
Third... yes it is early days yet
The Mission... yes what is the mission again? Really?
Peace... I think it is too late for peace. There might have been peace had the invasion been under the UN flag, in accordance with international law, for humanitarian reasons, and led by Arab leaders to a large degree and backed with US economical resources for real reconstruction and reparations (and not slush funds for looting). I also think that if Bush wins he will send US troops further into the ME region and start new wars. Syria or Iran, probably Syria, will be attacked during his second term.
But it is clear that the invasion of Iraq was not for humanitarian reasons but for geopolitical reasons much like Vietnam was a geopolitical war.
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
i would say urban is worse than jungle, more chances of civilian casualties, along with as many hiding places as jungle
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,758
- 603
- 126
More hiding places really. You can hide among the civilian population for ambuses...so you can effectively hide anywhere. Which has to do with the civilian casualties...its hard not to become trigger happy when every person you see is potentially trying to kill you.
They both suck...but I'd actually take jungle warfare myself.
Originally posted by: Gaard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted by: DoubleL
Do I think we were right, I didn't care one way or the other when I got their, I was a soldier and it was my job.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See, there's a difference between not caring and doing what you're told no questions asked.
You shouldn't take a part of what someone says and try and make it sound like something it is not, I was 18 years old, I wanted to fight for my country, Now could you even tell me what you mean by-See, there's a difference between not caring and doing what you're told no questions asked.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted by: DoubleL
Do I think we were right, I didn't care one way or the other when I got their, I was a soldier and it was my job.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See, there's a difference between not caring and doing what you're told no questions asked.
You shouldn't take a part of what someone says and try and make it sound like something it is not, I was 18 years old, I wanted to fight for my country, Now could you even tell me what you mean by-See, there's a difference between not caring and doing what you're told no questions asked.
This is what you said..."Do I think we were right, I didn't care one way or the other when I got their, I was a soldier and it was my job."
I take it from your "I was 18 years old" answer, you're saying that the fact that you didn't care if we were right was partly do to the fact that you were young? Can you tell us if that was a predominant feeling (or lack of) back then? Can we assume that feeling (or lack of) is shared by our GIs of today?
I would have to say the urban/jungle distinction is one without real differences. Both afford plenty of places to hide to facilitate both concealment and ambushes, and both heavily favor those who know their way around it against those who don't.
ericlp
Diamond Member
- Dec 24, 2000
- 6,137
- 225
- 106
Uh, you left out a few points... The biggest one of all, Vietnam does not have ANY OIL!!!
You really think we'd be there if it wassent for the oil?
Also, Bush Sr, couldn't finish the job so Jr had to figure out a way to get it done and did.
Look at all the WMD we found!!!!
Again, Vietnam didn't have any... So I guess you really couldn't say that was a difference.It's amazing there's still some stubborn people that think Vietnam was a good idea. These are the kind of people that would lead us into doom if they had the chance.
Obviously Vietnam is jungle and Iraq is desert. Obvious. But there are similarities.
The similarities are that we are waging a war that is doubted internationally and most importantly attempting to help a people that want no help and moreover don't really like us. It's also a war of choice: neither Vietnam nor Iraq poses a military threat to us. It's also a war where we're trying to win hearts and minds and the only way we are going to do that is by killing everyone, which we can't do.
Obviously Vietnam is jungle and Iraq is desert. Obvious. But there are similarities.
The similarities are that we are waging a war that is doubted internationally and most importantly attempting to help a people that want no help and moreover don't really like us. It's also a war of choice: neither Vietnam nor Iraq poses a military threat to us. It's also a war where we're trying to win hearts and minds and the only way we are going to do that is by killing everyone, which we can't do.
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: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter