Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
We were there for 21 years.
What is it we wanted to be doing there in the first place? What were the goals? That's the issue. We had no clear goal, just a platitude about "fighting Communism".
We went under the UN and many countries participated..... The object was to stop the spread of Communism.
we could have won easily but the Democrats would not let us do that.
You mean if the Democrat president, Lyndon Johnson hadn't sent half a million troops over there?
we did not need that.....just a few low yield nuclear explosions in strategic position
This question was brought up in another thread about Libya which I don't want to derail any further; but I find it interesting. It appears that many people have a different perspective and I find it funny. So please, cast your vote and if you are enclined explain your choice.
I have voted the Vietnamese. The goal of their war was to reunite Vietnam and it was achieved.
God help us!
America won most of the battles
Vietnam won the war
America accomplished its ultimate objective (the death of Soviet communism)
And now we have a new dynamic to deal with in Asia, namely Chinese communism.
I like the 2 votes for Canada. Seeing as they weren't in Vietnam I guess you could say that yup they were the big winners
The more interesting question to me: if the USA had won the Vietnam War outright, in what way would Asia be different today? In what way would China be different?
This question was brought up in another thread about Libya which I don't want to derail any further; but I find it interesting. It appears that many people have a different perspective and I find it funny. So please, cast your vote and if you are enclined explain your choice.
I have voted the Vietnamese. The goal of their war was to reunite Vietnam and it was achieved.
I don't think anyone can answer that question just like no one can say what would have happened In Nam if JFK had not been killed.
Actually we never lost a battle in Nam and that includes Tet.
we did not need that.....just a few low yield nuclear explosions in strategic position
Therein lies the problem. Vietnam was not a war of battles, it was a guerrilla war. There really were no battles in the conventional sense, yet our strategy and tactics were all about looking for them. We were as lost in Vietnam as the Redcoats were lost in the colonies; trying to fight a war on our terms and losing it because we failed to adapt.
Sorry, the objective of the "North" was the reunification of Vietnam and the expulsion of the western imperialists. That mission was accomplished; our was not.
We may not have lost a battle, but we clearly lost the war.
I would say the North Vietnamese and their allies the USSR and China. Who lost, the South Vietnamese to include the 2 million South Vietnamese who were killed or died in the North Vietnamese re-education camps and fleeing Vietnam by boat. The Cambodians to include 2-3 million Camobidans who were either killed or died at the hands of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge along with another 500,000 Laotians who were also killed by the PL to include the attempted extermination of the Hmong tribe of Northern Laos particularly around the PDJ. I would also include the United and the allied forces in Vietnam.
true true
just wonder if, in retrospect, we would have been better off had we stuck it out
Maybe you're too young to know and didn't consider history important.... Some friendly help.....
Uhhhh, You are incorrect about Canadians in Viet Nam......
Link: http://http://canadiansinvietnam.com/index.html
If one doesn't know history he will be condemned to repeat it.
Thom Paine
Canada and the Vietnam War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaCanada did not fight in the Vietnam War and diplomatically it was "officially non-belligerent".[1] The country's troop deployments to Vietnam were limited to a small number of national forces in 1973 to help enforce the Paris Peace Accords.
It was Ho Chi Minh and his North Vietnamese soldiers that put an end to the murderous regime of Pol Pot and his Khymer Rouge.
We'd still be there.
That is so much BS.The US acheived it's goal of making the South militarily self-sufficient, with the premise that the US would continue to supply war materiel as needed. Two years after the US combat troops left Vietnam, the South was defeated, mainly because the Democrat Congress in it's euphoria at having unseated Nixon naturally stabbed America's ally in the back.
You think so?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?