Do You Feel America Won The Vietnam War?

[rightwinger]

We lost the Viet Nam war because it was mico managed from the WH.

We lost because we never had an exit strategy

 

[BullKurtz]

You who didn't fight there have no right to claim "we" about any of it. Those of us who did know who won what and who quit what when it was won. Left wing trash has no say in any of it....ya 5th column cocksuckers.

 

[Roadrunner]

You who didn't fight there have no right to claim "we" about any of it. Those of us who did know who won what and who quit what when it was won. Left wing trash has no say in any of it....ya 5th column cocksuckers.

I respect that POV, but, that said, I don't think they ever would have stopped.

They were fighting at HOME.

But yes, we quit, the ARVN lost the war.

We were gone.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I'm serious.

We accomplished none of our goals.

Was it just because our politicians got tired of it?

What are your ideas?

We won the military objectives but lost because the Democrats in 1975 refused to abide by the treaty we made the South sign so we could leave.

South Vietnam never fell to an insurgency they were invaded by North Vietnam in 1975. We refused air and naval support and had cut off their funding for armor support the year before. They never had a chance against 25 North Vietnamese Divisions yet fought for a month to survive.

The 68 TET offensive destroyed the insurgency and ruined the North Vietnamese plans. The North admitted this after they won the war. They probed the South in 75 and when the US refused to live up to the treaty they invaded.

 

[healthmyths]

I'm serious.

We accomplished none of our goals.

Was it just because our politicians got tired of it?

What are your ideas?

The war was won in the trenches but lost in the hearts of the public as the following attests...

"Donning helmet, Mr. Cronkite declared the war lost," recounted UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave.
"It was this now famous television news piece that persuaded President Lyndon Johnson...not to run for re-election."
Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media's complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened "convinced him America's resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp," Mr. de Borchgrave said.
Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, knew something else as well, and profited from it:
that waging war in the television age depended as much on propaganda as it did on success in the field.
These lessons were driven home in the Tet offensive of 1968, when North Vietnamese regulars and Communist guerrillas, the Vietcong, attacked scores of military targets and provincial capitals throughout South Vietnam, only to be thrown back with overwhelming losses. General Giap had expected the offensive to set off uprisings and show the Vietnamese that the Americans were vulnerable.

Militarily, it was a failure. But the offensive came as opposition to the war was growing in the United States, and the televised savagery of the fighting fueled another wave of protests. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had been contemplating retirement months before Tet, decided not to seek re-election, and with the election of Richard M. Nixon in November, the long withdrawal of American forces began.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/world/asia/gen-vo-nguyen-giap-dies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Earlier this month, the Army sponsored a conference for retired general officers at Fort Carson, Colorado. They were addressed by recent returnees from Iraq, including Col. H.R. McMaster, commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

"All returnees agreed we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but are losing the public relations battle," said a retired admiral in an email to friends.

A disturbing anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates why. His 3rd ACR broke the insurgents' hold of the city of Tal Afar last September in an operation which generated these effusive words of praise from the town's mayor:

"To the lion hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets...(you are) not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism."
Time magazine had a reporter and a photographer embedded with the 3rd ACR. When the battle was over, they filed a lengthy story and nearly 100 photographs.

"When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of the reporter's story and none of the photographs he submitted were used," said the admiral, quoting Col. McMaster. "When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors...responded that the story and pictures were 'too heroic.'"

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Iraq Vietnam the MSM Dan Rather

 

[Vandalshandle]

The North Vietnamese, who had been fighting every year since about 1942, or over 30 years, thinks that they won the war, simply because they took over all of Vietnam, toppled the South's government, and drove the US out of their country. Actually, we just let them think that because our plan all along was to withdraw and grant them Favored Nation trading status, so that they would make extremely cheap shirts for us, which we can now buy at Walmart.That makes them slaves to us capitalists!

 

[Vandalshandle]

Whenever I start reading about how we had won the war, and that the democrats gave our victory away, I start to visualize the alternative universe that many of us live in. That is difficult because it is kind of like visualizing a 4th and 5th dimension. I suspect that LSD users may be able to do that, but not me.

 

[healthmyths]

For example, in 1995 the Wall Street Journal published an interview with Bui Tin, a former colonel who served on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, that included the following exchange:
Q: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?

A: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said, "We don't need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out."

Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi's victory?

A: It was essential to our strategy. Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.

Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?

A: Keenly

Q: Why?

A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.

Q: What else?

A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.
(The article notes that this interview was conducted after Bui Tin became "disillusioned with the fruits of Vietnamese communism" and left Vietnam to live in Paris, so it's possible that his comments may have been influenced by his changed outlook.)
Read more at snopes.com General Vo Nguyen Giap on the Vietnam War

 

[BullKurtz]

To those who believed Walter Cronkite's version of who won Tet, you might want to know that Walter spent the war in the bar at the Hotel Rex in Saigon, trying to interview officers who were told he was off-limits. One time my Recon team was pulled off a sneak and told to take Walter up to Doc To for a tour to see the defoliation. Why us? Because Walter had cache with Westmoreland, who was trying to keep CBS from declaring the war a disaster. So we left an area where information was needed as to the whereabouts of the NVA 33rd and flown to Saigon to pick up Walter. But Walter wasn't there....he was dead drunk in his room and remained so for the 4 hours we waited. That's how the war was covered by CBS and that old drunk.

 

[healthmyths]

To those who believed Walter Cronkite's version of who won Tet, you might want to know that Walter spent the war in the bar at the Hotel Rex in Saigon, trying to interview officers who were told he was off-limits. One time my Recon team was pulled off a sneak and told to take Walter up to Doc To for a tour to see the defoliation. Why us? Because Walter had cache with Westmoreland, who was trying to keep CBS from declaring the war a disaster. So we left an area where information was needed as to the whereabouts of the NVA 33rd and flown to Saigon to pick up Walter. But Walter wasn't there....he was dead drunk in his room and remained so for the 4 hours we waited. That's how the war was covered by CBS and that old drunk.

Thanks for that insight on Cronkite. I like millions grew up on the "most trusted man" BUT as I learned more about the bias of the MSM against the military and our country because it was "cool"...I don't doubt for a second your experience with him.
A truly biased MSM has brought the USA to this state.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm serious.

We accomplished none of our goals.

Was it just because our politicians got tired of it?

What are your ideas?

The war was won in the trenches but lost in the hearts of the public as the following attests...

"Donning helmet, Mr. Cronkite declared the war lost," recounted UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave.
"It was this now famous television news piece that persuaded President Lyndon Johnson...not to run for re-election."
Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media's complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened "convinced him America's resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp," Mr. de Borchgrave said.
Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, knew something else as well, and profited from it:
that waging war in the television age depended as much on propaganda as it did on success in the field.
These lessons were driven home in the Tet offensive of 1968, when North Vietnamese regulars and Communist guerrillas, the Vietcong, attacked scores of military targets and provincial capitals throughout South Vietnam, only to be thrown back with overwhelming losses. General Giap had expected the offensive to set off uprisings and show the Vietnamese that the Americans were vulnerable.

Militarily, it was a failure. But the offensive came as opposition to the war was growing in the United States, and the televised savagery of the fighting fueled another wave of protests. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had been contemplating retirement months before Tet, decided not to seek re-election, and with the election of Richard M. Nixon in November, the long withdrawal of American forces began.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/world/asia/gen-vo-nguyen-giap-dies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Earlier this month, the Army sponsored a conference for retired general officers at Fort Carson, Colorado. They were addressed by recent returnees from Iraq, including Col. H.R. McMaster, commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

"All returnees agreed we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but are losing the public relations battle," said a retired admiral in an email to friends.

A disturbing anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates why. His 3rd ACR broke the insurgents' hold of the city of Tal Afar last September in an operation which generated these effusive words of praise from the town's mayor:

"To the lion hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets...(you are) not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism."
Time magazine had a reporter and a photographer embedded with the 3rd ACR. When the battle was over, they filed a lengthy story and nearly 100 photographs.

"When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of the reporter's story and none of the photographs he submitted were used," said the admiral, quoting Col. McMaster. "When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors...responded that the story and pictures were 'too heroic.'"

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Iraq Vietnam the MSM Dan Rather

With Walter Cronkite it was shoot the messenger from the war hawks. Cronkite was stating the obvious. The war was lost.

Not necessarily on the battlefield but on the homefront. Americans were realizing that they had been lied to. Lied to about the reasons for war, lied to about our prospects of victory, lied to about the threat
Americans began to ask....Is it worth it to lose over 50,000 of our boys just to "win"?

The answer then and the answer now is......NO

 

[healthmyths]

I'm serious.

We accomplished none of our goals.

Was it just because our politicians got tired of it?

What are your ideas?

The war was won in the trenches but lost in the hearts of the public as the following attests...

"Donning helmet, Mr. Cronkite declared the war lost," recounted UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave.
"It was this now famous television news piece that persuaded President Lyndon Johnson...not to run for re-election."
Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media's complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened "convinced him America's resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp," Mr. de Borchgrave said.
Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, knew something else as well, and profited from it:
that waging war in the television age depended as much on propaganda as it did on success in the field.
These lessons were driven home in the Tet offensive of 1968, when North Vietnamese regulars and Communist guerrillas, the Vietcong, attacked scores of military targets and provincial capitals throughout South Vietnam, only to be thrown back with overwhelming losses. General Giap had expected the offensive to set off uprisings and show the Vietnamese that the Americans were vulnerable.

Militarily, it was a failure. But the offensive came as opposition to the war was growing in the United States, and the televised savagery of the fighting fueled another wave of protests. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had been contemplating retirement months before Tet, decided not to seek re-election, and with the election of Richard M. Nixon in November, the long withdrawal of American forces began.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/world/asia/gen-vo-nguyen-giap-dies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Earlier this month, the Army sponsored a conference for retired general officers at Fort Carson, Colorado. They were addressed by recent returnees from Iraq, including Col. H.R. McMaster, commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

"All returnees agreed we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but are losing the public relations battle," said a retired admiral in an email to friends.

A disturbing anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates why. His 3rd ACR broke the insurgents' hold of the city of Tal Afar last September in an operation which generated these effusive words of praise from the town's mayor:

"To the lion hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets...(you are) not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism."
Time magazine had a reporter and a photographer embedded with the 3rd ACR. When the battle was over, they filed a lengthy story and nearly 100 photographs.

"When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of the reporter's story and none of the photographs he submitted were used," said the admiral, quoting Col. McMaster. "When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors...responded that the story and pictures were 'too heroic.'"

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Iraq Vietnam the MSM Dan Rather

With Walter Cronkite it was shoot the messenger from the war hawks. Cronkite was stating the obvious. The war was lost.

Not necessarily on the battlefield but on the homefront. Americans were realizing that they had been lied to. Lied to about the reasons for war, lied to about our prospects of victory, lied to about the threat
Americans began to ask....Is it worth it to lose over 50,000 of our boys just to "win"?

The answer then and the answer now is......NO

So obviously you think when the USA signs treaties, agreements, NATO, SEATO they are meaningless?
Just like when you agree to buy a car, make payments, or home....you just sign and when first payment due you don't pay.
What happens next?
Much like agreements you sign, the USA agrees to terms and conditions and NATO,SEATO were all agreements that the USA
agreed to come to the assistance if the other members to the agreements are invaded.
That happened in Vietnam, in Kuwait, and as there was a "1991 Cease Fire" with Iraq that Saddam repeatedly broke and therefore
the Liberation of Iraq...again agreements the USA had signed to come to the assistance of co-signers.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm serious.

We accomplished none of our goals.

Was it just because our politicians got tired of it?

What are your ideas?

The war was won in the trenches but lost in the hearts of the public as the following attests...

"Donning helmet, Mr. Cronkite declared the war lost," recounted UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave.
"It was this now famous television news piece that persuaded President Lyndon Johnson...not to run for re-election."
Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media's complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened "convinced him America's resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp," Mr. de Borchgrave said.
Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, knew something else as well, and profited from it:
that waging war in the television age depended as much on propaganda as it did on success in the field.
These lessons were driven home in the Tet offensive of 1968, when North Vietnamese regulars and Communist guerrillas, the Vietcong, attacked scores of military targets and provincial capitals throughout South Vietnam, only to be thrown back with overwhelming losses. General Giap had expected the offensive to set off uprisings and show the Vietnamese that the Americans were vulnerable.

Militarily, it was a failure. But the offensive came as opposition to the war was growing in the United States, and the televised savagery of the fighting fueled another wave of protests. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who had been contemplating retirement months before Tet, decided not to seek re-election, and with the election of Richard M. Nixon in November, the long withdrawal of American forces began.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/world/asia/gen-vo-nguyen-giap-dies.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Earlier this month, the Army sponsored a conference for retired general officers at Fort Carson, Colorado. They were addressed by recent returnees from Iraq, including Col. H.R. McMaster, commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

"All returnees agreed we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but are losing the public relations battle," said a retired admiral in an email to friends.

A disturbing anecdote from Col. McMaster illustrates why. His 3rd ACR broke the insurgents' hold of the city of Tal Afar last September in an operation which generated these effusive words of praise from the town's mayor:

"To the lion hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets...(you are) not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism."
Time magazine had a reporter and a photographer embedded with the 3rd ACR. When the battle was over, they filed a lengthy story and nearly 100 photographs.

"When the issue came out, the guts had been edited out of the reporter's story and none of the photographs he submitted were used," said the admiral, quoting Col. McMaster. "When the reporter questioned why his story was eviscerated, his editors...responded that the story and pictures were 'too heroic.'"

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Iraq Vietnam the MSM Dan Rather

With Walter Cronkite it was shoot the messenger from the war hawks. Cronkite was stating the obvious. The war was lost.

Not necessarily on the battlefield but on the homefront. Americans were realizing that they had been lied to. Lied to about the reasons for war, lied to about our prospects of victory, lied to about the threat
Americans began to ask....Is it worth it to lose over 50,000 of our boys just to "win"?

The answer then and the answer now is......NO

So obviously you think when the USA signs treaties, agreements, NATO, SEATO they are meaningless?
Just like when you agree to buy a car, make payments, or home....you just sign and when first payment due you don't pay.
What happens next?
Much like agreements you sign, the USA agrees to terms and conditions and NATO,SEATO were all agreements that the USA
agreed to come to the assistance if the other members to the agreements are invaded.
That happened in Vietnam, in Kuwait, and as there was a "1991 Cease Fire" with Iraq that Saddam repeatedly broke and therefore
the Liberation of Iraq...again agreements the USA had signed to come to the assistance of co-signers.

That is the best card you have in your hand?

Treaties?
Where was the rest of NATO and SEATO in VietNam?

The Government has a more important treaty with the American people. They will not engage in unnecessary wars. The American people figured it out....it is obvious that our war hawks still haven't

 

[BlindBoo]

Well no of course not. Congress never declared war on Vietnam.

 

[Desperado]

The only good that came out of the Vietnam war.is that it lead to the elimination of the Draft and the start of the volunteer army.
Otherwise it was a waste of blood and money.

 

[Desperado]

We would have.. except scumbags like Cronkite decided to start misreporting the war to turn American's sentiments against the effort. That man should have been tried for treason.

I believe you have that backwards, Cronkite did not decided to start misreporting the war to turn American's sentiments against the effort. The fact is he started reporting American's sentiments were against the war and were tired of having their sons killed for no apparent benefit in Vietnam

 

[NYcarbineer]

Since the US is now losing jobs to a capitalist Vietnam,

I assume conservatives consider that a good case for us having won.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Vietnam, a communist state, via the North defeating the South despite the help of the USA, is the proof of the silliness of the post
Do You Feel America Won The Vietnam War?

 

[BullKurtz]

.With Walter Cronkite it was shoot the messenger from the war hawks. Cronkite was stating the obvious. The war was lost.

If that's true how come the NVA didn't know it, you sack of shit draft-dodging coward? They threw everything and the kitchen sink at us during Tet 1 & 2 and got chewed up and spit out. We had clear sailing to Hanoi but according to Cronkite, who was put out of the loop for his drinking and leftist sympathies, they'd surprised us during a cease-fire they'd begged us for and were destined to win. Walter was Tokyo Rose and Hanoi Jane rolled up into one fat-assed alcoholic moron with a microphone.

 

[nodoginnafight]

You can trust me on this one.
We did not win that war. Who would even ask such a stupid question?