The Vietnam War

[Daryl Hunt]

In all fairness to Whilehall, the bay of Tonkin was a lie. That was what LBJ used as an excuse to launch the Great Police Action of Vietnam.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

A failed military escapade that cost 50,000 American lives.

Disgusting!

Lets not forget the over 1 million mostly innocent hillbilly Vietnamese like the ones " "Maverick' McCain bombed at a light bulb factory when they shot the arrogant fucker down and stuck his dumb ass in a dog kennel.

Welcome to War, Sonny. The NVA used lightbulbs.

 

[Likkmee]

A failed military escapade that cost 50,000 American lives.

Disgusting!

Lets not forget the over 1 million mostly innocent hillbilly Vietnamese like the ones " "Maverick' McCain bombed at a light bulb factory when they shot the arrogant fucker down and stuck his dumb ass in a dog kennel.

Welcome to War, Sonny. The NVA used lightbulbs.

Yeah water , aspirinin and other such "weapons" too. You're a true Amerttykan.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

A failed military escapade that cost 50,000 American lives.

Disgusting!

Lets not forget the over 1 million mostly innocent hillbilly Vietnamese like the ones " "Maverick' McCain bombed at a light bulb factory when they shot the arrogant fucker down and stuck his dumb ass in a dog kennel.

Welcome to War, Sonny. The NVA used lightbulbs.

Yeah water , aspirinin and other such "weapons" too. You're a true Amerttykan.

I am retired Military. I don't make excuses. I don't judge. I don't second guess. But I do know that when you wage war, it's best to wage ALL war instead of just the parts you can stomach. War isn't for the feint hearted. We played waarr and lost 50,000 people playing those stupid games. Games played by human lives. Whatt we finally did was actually stop playing war and start doing war and it had a profound affect. Had we done that in the first place There would be 50,000 lives that would not have been sacrificed for very little. War isn't supposed to be fun. It's not supposed to be entertaining. It's not supposed to the first avenue. It's suppose to be the last resort. It's supposed to be just short of the unthinkable. It's supposed to be just short of hell. It's filled with misery, death and suffering. And the shorter it is the better it is. Our actions from 1969 and on were the right decisions to end that war. Those actions should have been done in 1965. The French didn't have the stomach to do those actions and millions suffered as a direct result. Or, we shouldn't have been there in the first place.

You can justify things till you are blue in the face but we were there. Our Leadership was pathetic from 1964 to 1968 and millions paid a very steep price for it. On the other hand, the North Vietnamese and South Vietnamese had equally dismal leadership as well. Pretty much, there is enough blame to go around in all three governments. Everyone else was just pawns. But the War happened and those that fought it on all sides should be honored, not scorned. These fine Warriors are both the victims and the Heroes. And you do NOT have the right to try and take that away from them. And I include the NVA, SVA as well as the United States Military in that honor.

 

[harmonica]

A failed military escapade that cost 50,000 American lives.

Disgusting!

You can thank J Kennedy and L Johnson for that fiasco, not to mention Truman who should of told France to fuck off when Ho Chi asked for Vietnams freedom...France got their ass handed to them again, JFK sent in troops to see how bad, France bailed out, like the pussies they are, then LBJ went full war monger, so his military buddies could make billions while killing off young men, making his economy look better..

oh and dont forget Dick Nixon.He expanded the war his buddy LBJ started.

he got us out of it

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

 

[Votto]

A failed military escapade that cost 50,000 American lives.

Disgusting!

Meh.

More people die in the US every year from drugs coming across the border and no one gives a damn about that, now do they.

 

[Votto]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

so we go in and invade NV....this takes MASSIVE troops/$$$$$/time/logistics [ which we were NOT going to do ]
then we do a regime change like in Iraq/Afghanistan------then what???!!!

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

no one attacked the US/etc
we were not going to win
popular opinion was against it

 

[Votto]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

so we go in and invade NV....this takes MASSIVE troops/$$$$$/time/logistics [ which we were NOT going to do ]
then we do a regime change like in Iraq/Afghanistan------then what???!!!

I'm not saying you should do any of those things. What I'm saying is be prepared to pay the cost before invading another country.

Sometimes, like with Germany, it's worth it, but most times it is not.

 

[Votto]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

no one attacked the US/etc
we were not going to win
popular opinion was against it

Popular opinion?

I think you are referring to American popular opinion, when in reality they should have been focused on the popular opinion of the Vietnamese whose country was devastated by American troops who were largely unable to tell the difference between friend or foe.

For example, had Hitler invaded Russia with the goal of liberating the people instead of conquering them becaise he viewed them as inferior, he would have easily routed the oppressive Stalin.

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

so we go in and invade NV....this takes MASSIVE troops/$$$$$/time/logistics [ which we were NOT going to do ]
then we do a regime change like in Iraq/Afghanistan------then what???!!!

I'm not saying you should do any of those things. What I'm saying is be prepared to pay the cost before invading another country.

Sometimes, like with Germany, it's worth it, but most times it is not.

was Germany even worth it?
it was not a global economy like today
Germany could not have hurt us
they had, at best, their hands full with Russia

 

[rightwinger]

After WWII we promised North and South Vietnam that they could hold free elections to decide their fate

When it became obvious the North would win. We cancelled the elections

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

no one attacked the US/etc
we were not going to win
popular opinion was against it

Popular opinion?

I think you are referring to American popular opinion, when in reality they should have been focused on the popular opinion of the Vietnamese whose country was devastated by American troops who were largely unable to tell the difference between friend or foe.

For example, had Hitler invaded Russia with the goal of freeing the people he would have easily routed the oppressive Stalin.

not easily at all!!!!!!!
1. Russia is HUGE
2. bigger population
3. Germany invaded AND back stabbed Russia after the Non-Aggression Pact = just like what Japan did to us---so Russia is not giving up
etc
once hitler invaded Russia = war is over

 

[rightwinger]

Wherever the French were, they left a mess.

Like democrooks?

Detroit was destroyed by capitalists who used it up and abandoned it

 

[Votto]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

so we go in and invade NV....this takes MASSIVE troops/$$$$$/time/logistics [ which we were NOT going to do ]
then we do a regime change like in Iraq/Afghanistan------then what???!!!

I'm not saying you should do any of those things. What I'm saying is be prepared to pay the cost before invading another country.

Sometimes, like with Germany, it's worth it, but most times it is not.

was Germany even worth it?
it was not a global economy like today
Germany could not have hurt us
they had, at best, their hands full with Russia

That is for you to decide.

Were they a threat to world wide freedom?

Was stopping the Holocaust worth it?

See, these are all questions you can debate all day.

Another question I have, was Korea worth it? Here we have US troops still over there after how many decades as the US is in the middle of a nuclear confrontation?

Then I see pictures of Korea at night, with half lit up and the upper half dark as night.

For those people in the South, the answer is clear, it was worth it, but from a US perspective, the answer might be different.

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

no one attacked the US/etc
we were not going to win
popular opinion was against it

Popular opinion?

I think you are referring to American popular opinion, when in reality they should have been focused on the popular opinion of the Vietnamese whose country was devastated by American troops who were largely unable to tell the difference between friend or foe.

For example, had Hitler invaded Russia with the goal of liberating the people instead of conquering them becaise he viewed them as inferior, he would have easily routed the oppressive Stalin.

....there a very few examples [ if any ] post 1900 of countries invading another and completely taking it over/total victory
..can you name any?

....the US had overwhelming power/advantages/airpower/naval power/MANEUVER-tactical with helos/etc---and they LOST in Vietnam
..what makes you think hitler will defeat Russia AND England
..AND the partisans in Norway/Yugoslavia/Italy/France/etc etc ???

 

[harmonica]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

so we go in and invade NV....this takes MASSIVE troops/$$$$$/time/logistics [ which we were NOT going to do ]
then we do a regime change like in Iraq/Afghanistan------then what???!!!

I'm not saying you should do any of those things. What I'm saying is be prepared to pay the cost before invading another country.

Sometimes, like with Germany, it's worth it, but most times it is not.

was Germany even worth it?
it was not a global economy like today
Germany could not have hurt us
they had, at best, their hands full with Russia

That is for you to decide.

Were they a threat to world wide freedom?

Was stopping the Holocaust worth it?

See, these are all questions you can debate all day.

Another question I have, was Korea worth it? Here we have US troops still over there after how many decades as the US is in the middle of a nuclear confrontation?

Then I see pictures of Korea at night, with half lit up and the upper half dark as night.

For those people in the South, the answer is clear, it was worth it, but from a US perspective, the answer might be different.

my father fought in Korea
like Vietnam, why would it be worth it??
we lost Vietnam, Cambodia, AND Laos---------
the US is still ok

 

[Votto]

the war was virtually unwinnable
the NVA/VC did not even have to fight

Oh, it was winnable all right. The only question becomes, are you willing to pay the price?

Largely, most wars the US starts the answer is no. They just want to go in and create a regime change and declare victory, while ISIS takes over in the power vacuum.

Anyone who wants to start a war should know this, in Nazi Germany after the US took over there were insurgencies for over a decade, and that is without any hostile foreign powers that bordered Germany aiding and arming the Nazi attackers.

no one attacked the US/etc
we were not going to win
popular opinion was against it

Popular opinion?

I think you are referring to American popular opinion, when in reality they should have been focused on the popular opinion of the Vietnamese whose country was devastated by American troops who were largely unable to tell the difference between friend or foe.

For example, had Hitler invaded Russia with the goal of liberating the people instead of conquering them becaise he viewed them as inferior, he would have easily routed the oppressive Stalin.

....there a very few examples [ if any ] post 1900 of countries invading another and completely taking it over/total victory
..can you name any?

....the US had overwhelming power/advantages/airpower/naval power/MANEUVER-tactical with helos/etc---and they LOST in Vietnam
..what makes you think hitler will defeat Russia AND England
..AND the partisans in Norway/Yugoslavia/Italy/France/etc etc ???

It's true that trying to obtain global power over everyone is like pounding sand. As we see, Hitler was vanquished but there are still Nazi's running round trying to influence people. You take out one murderous dictator only to have another spring up in it's place.

But if you live in a house and have ants, do you hire an exterminator to get rid of them with the full knowledge that they will just come back anyway?

These questions are not always easy to answer.