General Westmoreland

[Picaro]

Post-atomic weapons era there are no more clear cut WWI-WW II style' definite 'wins', there aren't that kind of wars any more, so it's ridiculous to keep claiming them as 'losses' for us while pretending the 'other side' is always winning, just because a bunch of dumbass stoner 'journalists' and a bunch of American hating tards with teaching jobs in universalist keep spinning tham that way; they're fans of the Soviets and Maoists;their own states aren't successful, much less their colonies overseas. Replacing European colonials with commies and making them Soviet and Red Chinese colonies is so retarded and more than moronic, all it does is replace one master with a far worse one.

 

[Pilot1]

It wasn't just Westmoreland. It was also McNamara and the White House micro managing the military. McNamara was a numbers guy, MBA. He thought you could run a war with business style science meaning X input gives you Y output. Therefore, the number of sorties, rounds fired, troops in the field should yield a certain body count.

Body count became the metric. Not ground gained, nor objectives taken. Exactly, what were the objectives?

Madness.

 

[rightwinger]

....the US could NEVER win in Nam, but USMC Gen. Walt wanted to do it differently--small USMC/SV units--getting to know the people/etc
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usmc/williamson.pdf
Lewis William Walt - Wikipedia
etc

Being barred from the northern part kind of put a damper on that idea, though it did have much to recommend it. Viet Nam is quickly becoming an American satellite these days.

we could've even went into the North and nothing would change--they would've just:
waited us out
moved their troops

A US “Victory” would have led to Viet Cong led insurgency supported by Russia and China

We would have had to remain to support the Saigon Government and would still be taking casualties

Rubbish. What do you think the VC were? They were crushed by Tet, and their own leadership says this; it was the U.S. press and left wingers that kept them at war, with bullshit stories about how we were 'losing n stuff'. And we all know who won the Cold War, and Johnson's escalation in Viet Nam went a long way in bankrupting the Khrushchev Doctrine. It had to shut down its global insurrection campaign in 1973, and the West took it to a soft landing after that. It's more than stupid to keep babbling how ' we lost n stuff', when it's immediately obvious we didn't lose a thing.

Actually, their own leadership said they would have fought indefinitely. They had been fighting nonstop for 25 years, Tet was not going to stop them.

After Tet, it became obvious ....1,2,3 what are we fighting for?
It became obvious to all that we didn’t have a plan or an exit strategy

 

[rightwinger]

After WWII, Vietnam would have united under Ho Chi Minh and formed its own country......just like today
They would avoided millions of deaths

I agree any politician would have followed the path of LBJ. In Cold War USA, allowing Vietnam to turn communist was political suicide

Ho would have turned it into another North Korea, and more millions would have died. LBJ's polices crushed the Viet Cong, and yet the media kept claiming it was a 'loss', and also ignored the North's blatantly illegal invasions of the south, while all the commie sympathizers were running around calling Johnson and company 'war criminals', and of most dope addled idiots liked the sound of that, so the repeat it to this day. They would have kept on going, first Laos, then Cambodia, then Thailand, then Malaysia. Fortunately Viet Nam bankrupted the Soviets, the 1973 war ended their influence in the ME, and they collapsed in 1973, unable to exploit their victory.

Not necessarily
Ho had made repeated overtures to the West to support a free Vietnam. Colonialism was hated and oppressive. When the West supported a return to Colonial rule, Communism offered a tempting alternative

Ho was a Red; his 'overtures' were rightly rejected as bullshit, and his word meant nothing.

lol @ communism offering 'an alternative' to oppression. IT would merely become a Russian colony, which is exactly what it did for a few years.

No, at the time, Ho was not a red

Eventually, the Communists offered Ho a better option than the Colonial Capitalists

Ho was a Red from the beginning. That's why the Red Chinese and Soviets supported him. He was recruited in France.

Actually, he wasn’t
He wanted to work with the Western Powers

 

[cnm]

Post-atomic weapons era there are no more clear cut WWI-WW II style' definite 'wins', there aren't that kind of wars any more, so it's ridiculous to keep claiming them as 'losses'

Yet other nations managed to win guerilla wars, a la Malaya.

 

[cnm]

Exactly, what were the objectives?

Killing Vietnamese. As you say, madness. What has changed in US foreign policy?

 

[Mindful]

Exactly, what were the objectives?

Killing Vietnamese. As you say, madness. What has changed in US foreign policy?

Asinine comment.

Downstairs accommodates trolls like you.

 

[harmonica]

Post-atomic weapons era there are no more clear cut WWI-WW II style' definite 'wins', there aren't that kind of wars any more, so it's ridiculous to keep claiming them as 'losses'

Yet other nations managed to win guerilla wars, a la Malaya.

you mention 1 out of thousands of wars

 

[harmonica]

Post-atomic weapons era there are no more clear cut WWI-WW II style' definite 'wins', there aren't that kind of wars any more, so it's ridiculous to keep claiming them as 'losses'

Yet other nations managed to win guerilla wars, a la Malaya.

and they didn't win

1968 to 1989

Communist insurgency in Malaysia (1968–89) - Wikipedia

 

[GLASNOST]

I am grateful for your life and I hope that it has been joyful for you. I give thanks for your survival.

Thank you for your concern. That is very kind. It was rough but I eventually got through it with both arms and legs intact.

As a young girl, high school, college, I did the best that I knew how to stop it, including protests in my home town in NJ, and serving as a marshal in the protests in DC when I became a university student there. The school doctor made me read instructions on what to do if tear-gassed. I sat on the steps of the Capitol building looking out over a crowd of people amassed on the National Mall protesting this atrocity. Over 200 thousand, I think.

You remind me of all the ”do-gooders” of the time. It seemed to me that they must have been born while I was in Vietnam because I never saw such people before I went into the Army 1965 – 68. I came back from Vietnam in 1967 and flew straight to Ft. Lewis, Washington for a phoney ”debriefing” - it lasted only about 20 minutes and consisted of not much more than ”welcome home” Then I went to the civilian airport to start a 30-days leave before going to my next assignment. Anyway, I hadn't even checked in yet when I passed by a girl who was college age. She looked right at me and said, ”You ass-hole!” I was in uniform and my Vietnam ribbons were easy to spot. I couldn't believe she said that …. or why she said that. I'm not telling you this to judge or to criticize, just to tell you what happened.

A few short years later I was enrolled at university (on the G.I. Bill) and became a Vietnam Veteran Against the War. We planed to march all the way into the centre of town and do some shouting. Unfortunately the police were warned and we didn't get further than about 100 yards when they hit us with the gas. We were only just off the curb in front of the University campus!

The politicians now have done this again. Iraq. Afghanistan. Now Iran. Again and again and again. What is it about the human race that we have to keep fighting and killing for no reason under God?

They certainly have. But you are wrong about it being ”for no reason”. Some people are getting lots and lots of money for it …. and that is the reason. The only reason. But it is a reason … and it is worse than no reason at all. No reason can be a mistake but the reason this happens is no mistake. It is intentional. Killing and dying so someone can make a few gazillion dollars more. It is criminal.

How is your brother? Give him my regards.

 

[Lysistrata]

I am grateful for your life and I hope that it has been joyful for you. I give thanks for your survival.

Thank you for your concern. That is very kind. It was rough but I eventually got through it with both arms and legs intact.

As a young girl, high school, college, I did the best that I knew how to stop it, including protests in my home town in NJ, and serving as a marshal in the protests in DC when I became a university student there. The school doctor made me read instructions on what to do if tear-gassed. I sat on the steps of the Capitol building looking out over a crowd of people amassed on the National Mall protesting this atrocity. Over 200 thousand, I think.

You remind me of all the ”do-gooders” of the time. It seemed to me that they must have been born while I was in Vietnam because I never saw such people before I went into the Army 1965 – 68. I came back from Vietnam in 1967 and flew straight to Ft. Lewis, Washington for a phoney ”debriefing” - it lasted only about 20 minutes and consisted of not much more than ”welcome home” Then I went to the civilian airport to start a 30-days leave before going to my next assignment. Anyway, I hadn't even checked in yet when I passed by a girl who was college age. She looked right at me and said, ”You ass-hole!” I was in uniform and my Vietnam ribbons were easy to spot. I couldn't believe she said that …. or why she said that. I'm not telling you this to judge or to criticize, just to tell you what happened.

A few short years later I was enrolled at university (on the G.I. Bill) and became a Vietnam Veteran Against the War. We planed to march all the way into the centre of town and do some shouting. Unfortunately the police were warned and we didn't get further than about 100 yards when they hit us with the gas. We were only just off the curb in front of the University campus!

The politicians now have done this again. Iraq. Afghanistan. Now Iran. Again and again and again. What is it about the human race that we have to keep fighting and killing for no reason under God?

They certainly have. But you are wrong about it being ”for no reason”. Some people are getting lots and lots of money for it …. and that is the reason. The only reason. But it is a reason … and it is worse than no reason at all. No reason can be a mistake but the reason this happens is no mistake. It is intentional. Killing and dying so someone can make a few gazillion dollars more. It is criminal.

How is your brother? Give him my regards.

Thank you. My brother is as well as he will ever be.

I would never, ever, call you an asshole.

Money is the key.

About the time that you were in Nam, my beloved aunt, a treasure in our family, was serving there. Career USAF. Medical staff. Her job was to help save the lives of the wounded. Her name was Captain Anne Marie Yukon. She left Nam and was serving at Andrews AFB, which is why I went to college in DC. She first got to me when I weighed a little more than six pounds. She tried to teach me well on our journeys together. "Look left, look right, what decision do you make? Make a decision". She knew that her older sister, my biological mother, was incompetent.

 

[GLASNOST]

Thank you. My brother is as well as he will ever be.

I am not going to ask unless you want me to.

I would never, ever, call you an asshole.

That's OK. I learned to understand and my tolerance has improved greatly since then.

Money is the key.

Yes. But in a glutenous way.

About the time that you were in Nam, my beloved aunt, a treasure in our family, was serving there. Career USAF. Medical staff. Her job was to help save the lives of the wounded. Her name was Captain Anne Marie Yukon. She left Nam and was serving at Andrews AFB, which is why I went to college in DC. She first got to me when I weighed a little more than six pounds. She tried to teach me well on our journeys together. "Look left, look right, what decision do you make? Make a decision". She knew that her older sister, my biological mother, was incompetent.

This should be a lesson to everyone that we all have baggage to be put in order if we can ever make our lives worthwhile.

 

[Picaro]

....the US could NEVER win in Nam, but USMC Gen. Walt wanted to do it differently--small USMC/SV units--getting to know the people/etc
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usmc/williamson.pdf
Lewis William Walt - Wikipedia
etc

Being barred from the northern part kind of put a damper on that idea, though it did have much to recommend it. Viet Nam is quickly becoming an American satellite these days.

we could've even went into the North and nothing would change--they would've just:
waited us out
moved their troops

A US “Victory” would have led to Viet Cong led insurgency supported by Russia and China

We would have had to remain to support the Saigon Government and would still be taking casualties

Rubbish. What do you think the VC were? They were crushed by Tet, and their own leadership says this; it was the U.S. press and left wingers that kept them at war, with bullshit stories about how we were 'losing n stuff'. And we all know who won the Cold War, and Johnson's escalation in Viet Nam went a long way in bankrupting the Khrushchev Doctrine. It had to shut down its global insurrection campaign in 1973, and the West took it to a soft landing after that. It's more than stupid to keep babbling how ' we lost n stuff', when it's immediately obvious we didn't lose a thing.

Actually, their own leadership said they would have fought indefinitely. They had been fighting nonstop for 25 years, Tet was not going to stop them.

After Tet, it became obvious ....1,2,3 what are we fighting for?
It became obvious to all that we didn’t have a plan or an exit strategy

Actually Giap said they were finished as an armed resistance movement.

 

[Picaro]

Post-atomic weapons era there are no more clear cut WWI-WW II style' definite 'wins', there aren't that kind of wars any more, so it's ridiculous to keep claiming them as 'losses'

Yet other nations managed to win guerilla wars, a la Malaya.

and they didn't win

1968 to 1989

Communist insurgency in Malaysia (1968–89) - Wikipedia

If Johnson had dared to commit the same illegal movements as the North did into the South, he would have been impeached and imprisoned. Nobody said squat about the illegalities of Ho or his successors, not one charge ever brought against them; Johnson would have been fed to the wolves, by many in his own Party and all of the GOP. His hands were tied. Not so with Nixon, though he came close.

 

[rightwinger]

Being barred from the northern part kind of put a damper on that idea, though it did have much to recommend it. Viet Nam is quickly becoming an American satellite these days.

we could've even went into the North and nothing would change--they would've just:
waited us out
moved their troops

A US “Victory” would have led to Viet Cong led insurgency supported by Russia and China

We would have had to remain to support the Saigon Government and would still be taking casualties

Rubbish. What do you think the VC were? They were crushed by Tet, and their own leadership says this; it was the U.S. press and left wingers that kept them at war, with bullshit stories about how we were 'losing n stuff'. And we all know who won the Cold War, and Johnson's escalation in Viet Nam went a long way in bankrupting the Khrushchev Doctrine. It had to shut down its global insurrection campaign in 1973, and the West took it to a soft landing after that. It's more than stupid to keep babbling how ' we lost n stuff', when it's immediately obvious we didn't lose a thing.

Actually, their own leadership said they would have fought indefinitely. They had been fighting nonstop for 25 years, Tet was not going to stop them.

After Tet, it became obvious ....1,2,3 what are we fighting for?
It became obvious to all that we didn’t have a plan or an exit strategy

Actually Giap said they were finished as an armed resistance movement.

Show me him saying that

General Vo Nguyen Giap on the Vietnam War

 

[GLASNOST]

Actually Giap said they were finished as an armed resistance movement.

Show me him saying that

He doesn't need to show you. Picaro was there when Giap said it and let's face it .... he did say "Actually". What more proof do you need?

 

[rightwinger]

Actually Giap said they were finished as an armed resistance movement.

Show me him saying that

He doesn't need to show you. Picaro was there when Giap said it and let's face it .... he did say "Actually". What more proof do you need?

Vietnam was fighting a war to break the will of the US
How many deaths were we willing to tolerate?
20, 30, 40 thousand?

Turned out to be just under 60,000

Would we have accepted 100 or 200 thousand to gain victory?

 

[harmonica]

....the US could NEVER win in Nam, but USMC Gen. Walt wanted to do it differently--small USMC/SV units--getting to know the people/etc
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usmc/williamson.pdf
Lewis William Walt - Wikipedia
etc

Being barred from the northern part kind of put a damper on that idea, though it did have much to recommend it. Viet Nam is quickly becoming an American satellite these days.

we could've even went into the North and nothing would change--they would've just:
waited us out
moved their troops

A US “Victory” would have led to Viet Cong led insurgency supported by Russia and China

We would have had to remain to support the Saigon Government and would still be taking casualties

Rubbish. What do you think the VC were? They were crushed by Tet, and their own leadership says this; it was the U.S. press and left wingers that kept them at war, with bullshit stories about how we were 'losing n stuff'. And we all know who won the Cold War, and Johnson's escalation in Viet Nam went a long way in bankrupting the Khrushchev Doctrine. It had to shut down its global insurrection campaign in 1973, and the West took it to a soft landing after that. It's more than stupid to keep babbling how ' we lost n stuff', when it's immediately obvious we didn't lose a thing.

we lost
1. the communist took over SV
2. 50,000 dead and thousands more maimed/etc

 

[harmonica]

....the US could NEVER win in Nam, but USMC Gen. Walt wanted to do it differently--small USMC/SV units--getting to know the people/etc
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usmc/williamson.pdf
Lewis William Walt - Wikipedia
etc

Being barred from the northern part kind of put a damper on that idea, though it did have much to recommend it. Viet Nam is quickly becoming an American satellite these days.

we could've even went into the North and nothing would change--they would've just:
waited us out
moved their troops

A US “Victory” would have led to Viet Cong led insurgency supported by Russia and China

We would have had to remain to support the Saigon Government and would still be taking casualties

Rubbish. What do you think the VC were? They were crushed by Tet, and their own leadership says this; it was the U.S. press and left wingers that kept them at war, with bullshit stories about how we were 'losing n stuff'. And we all know who won the Cold War, and Johnson's escalation in Viet Nam went a long way in bankrupting the Khrushchev Doctrine. It had to shut down its global insurrection campaign in 1973, and the West took it to a soft landing after that. It's more than stupid to keep babbling how ' we lost n stuff', when it's immediately obvious we didn't lose a thing.

we lost
1. the communist took over SV
2. 50,000 dead and thousands more maimed/etc

AND
the US divided
losing credibility all over the world

 

[harmonica]

Being barred from the northern part kind of put a damper on that idea, though it did have much to recommend it. Viet Nam is quickly becoming an American satellite these days.

we could've even went into the North and nothing would change--they would've just:
waited us out
moved their troops

A US “Victory” would have led to Viet Cong led insurgency supported by Russia and China

We would have had to remain to support the Saigon Government and would still be taking casualties

Rubbish. What do you think the VC were? They were crushed by Tet, and their own leadership says this; it was the U.S. press and left wingers that kept them at war, with bullshit stories about how we were 'losing n stuff'. And we all know who won the Cold War, and Johnson's escalation in Viet Nam went a long way in bankrupting the Khrushchev Doctrine. It had to shut down its global insurrection campaign in 1973, and the West took it to a soft landing after that. It's more than stupid to keep babbling how ' we lost n stuff', when it's immediately obvious we didn't lose a thing.

Actually, their own leadership said they would have fought indefinitely. They had been fighting nonstop for 25 years, Tet was not going to stop them.

After Tet, it became obvious ....1,2,3 what are we fighting for?
It became obvious to all that we didn’t have a plan or an exit strategy

Actually Giap said they were finished as an armed resistance movement.

like the US defeats in the Revolutionary War?
The 25 Deadliest Battles of the Revolutionary War - Journal of the American Revolution