The advantages of the Vietnam war.

[NoNukes]

Those of us who served in Vietnam did not lose squat. We never lost a major battle. We just left. In 1969, the entire 3rd Marine Division went to Okinawa. As of March 29, 1973, all American Troops were gone from Vietnam.

I have no regrets and make no apologies for my combat service in Vietnam.

I suggest you read A VIETNCONG MEMOIR by Truong Nhu Tang and FOLLOWING HO CHI MINH by Bui Tin

It appears most of you experts were not yet born or too young to serve in Vietnam. Let us not forget the Socialists who dodged the draft.

How are people who dodged the draft for moral reasons Socialists?

 

[NoNukes]

From what I gathered, the historical origins of the Vietnam War was an attempt to preserve the last vestiges of French colonial rule. Now most films about that war show it from the perspective of the American grunt; but that was not really the truth. America attempted to win that war by a massive air bombing campaign which resulted in the deaths of conservatively of two million Vietnamese civilians. Though war is not as simple as fiction where it can be simplified as good versus evil, the human cost of that war for both American soldiers and the people of Vietnam was high. North Vietnam was not or ever was a threat to the United States, but they paid a very high cost in the lives of their people for a conflict between to much larger global powers. Though Communism was an oppressive, totalitarian influence in the second half of the twentieth century, is it wrong to say that a nation has a right to decide by what ideology their country should be governed without foreign interference.

Vietnam was not a threat, Communism was. Communism is and was the opposite of freedom.

The deaths of the Vietnamese was a direct result of Communism. If the USA did not intervene its impossible to say if the death toll would of been higher. There is not one Country in the world where the people embrace and celebrate Communism. To assume in Vietnam that Communism would be accepted peacefully is an opinion ignorant of the facts of History.

Communism in Vietnam resulted in the deaths of whatever number of people you care to attribute to the USA.

The people of Vietnam had a right to decide on what type of government they wanted, not having it shoved down their throats with a rifle. Many of the poor rice farmers would have been better off under Communism.

 

[Indofred]

Those of us who served in Vietnam did not lose squat. We never lost a major battle. We just left. In 1969, the entire 3rd Marine Division went to Okinawa. As of March 29, 1973, all American Troops were gone from Vietnam.

I have no regrets and make no apologies for my combat service in Vietnam.

I suggest you read A VIETNCONG MEMOIR by Truong Nhu Tang and FOLLOWING HO CHI MINH by Bui Tin

It appears most of you experts were not yet born or too young to serve in Vietnam. Let us not forget the Socialists who dodged the draft.

Regardless of the excuses used, America left Vietnam but there was no massive Communist surge and no danger at all to the U.S. mainland.

These facts being undisputed, why did America enter the war?
If it was to defend against communism, the people who sold this idea must have been wrong.

 

[Indofred]

Vietnam was not a threat, Communism was. Communism is and was the opposite of freedom.

The deaths of the Vietnamese was a direct result of Communism. If the USA did not intervene its impossible to say if the death toll would of been higher. There is not one Country in the world where the people embrace and celebrate Communism. To assume in Vietnam that Communism would be accepted peacefully is an opinion ignorant of the facts of History.

Communism in Vietnam resulted in the deaths of whatever number of people you care to attribute to the USA.

Given you left Vietnam, what threat was there from communism to America.
You left - no problem for America.
I don't recall ever reading about a communist invasion of Florida - only an American backed invasion of Cuba.
I wonder where the real threats of death and violence came from?

As for the death toll - a lot less as the south would have lost far faster and all the deaths from American carpet bombing of civilians would never had happened.

 

[Indofred]

That is not an argument that we should have not intervened though. That is simply a statement that we failed in that endeavor.

There is a difference.

Not if the aim was to defend against communism, thus protecting the U.S. mainland.
That failed war would, had the excuse been valid, had led to disaster for America.

It did not, thus, the excuse for war was bullshit.

Not really.

The fight against communism took place on a dozen battlefields. Just because you lost one such incident does not mean that you didn't win the overall conflict. The west won in most of the other locations so even that line of logic really does not stand up.

How many communist nations attacked America and how many were attacked by America.
Given America suffered no loss of life and zero damage because there were no communist attacks on America, one has to question where the threat to people came from.

 

[elektra]

Vietnam was not a threat, Communism was. Communism is and was the opposite of freedom.

The deaths of the Vietnamese was a direct result of Communism. If the USA did not intervene its impossible to say if the death toll would of been higher. There is not one Country in the world where the people embrace and celebrate Communism. To assume in Vietnam that Communism would be accepted peacefully is an opinion ignorant of the facts of History.

Communism in Vietnam resulted in the deaths of whatever number of people you care to attribute to the USA.

Given you left Vietnam, what threat was there from communism to America.
You left - no problem for America.
I don't recall ever reading about a communist invasion of Florida - only an American backed invasion of Cuba.
I wonder where the real threats of death and violence came from?

As for the death toll - a lot less as the south would have lost far faster and all the deaths from American carpet bombing of civilians would never had happened.

So your belief is that despite the fact that the Communist brutally murdered and caused the deaths of millions, that Communism's stated goal was complete rule over all people in the world, that there was never a threat?

Tens of Million dead directly because of Communism, Communists driving tanks into other countries, killing those who oppose them, and there is zero threat.

Oh, I get it, those who fled the Tyrant have no right to stop a Tyrant, we must sit quietly and watch or relatives die.

The free people of the world should just huddle in the one sanctuary from death and murder, just hide here and ignore Communism's rise to power and control, because it can never hurt us, even if it grew and kept getting more and more powerful?

If the USA never fought Communism what would the world be today, most likely we would not have this discussion, your parents or yourself would of died in the war we would of fought to prevent Communism from taking over the USA.

Communist conquering the entire World was never a threat to freedom?

 

[FA_Q2]

Not if the aim was to defend against communism, thus protecting the U.S. mainland.
That failed war would, had the excuse been valid, had led to disaster for America.

It did not, thus, the excuse for war was bullshit.

Not really.

The fight against communism took place on a dozen battlefields. Just because you lost one such incident does not mean that you didn't win the overall conflict. The west won in most of the other locations so even that line of logic really does not stand up.

How many communist nations attacked America and how many were attacked by America.
Given America suffered no loss of life and zero damage because there were no communist attacks on America, one has to question where the threat to people came from.

If you cant acknowledge the existence of the cold war or how superpowers war through small proxy nations then I cant fathom why you even bothered to ask the question.


You have your answer - you are not looking for debate as far as I can tell.

 

[Indofred]

So your belief is that despite the fact that the Communist brutally murdered and caused the deaths of millions, that Communism's stated goal was complete rule over all people in the world, that there was never a threat?

Tens of Million dead directly because of Communism, Communists driving tanks into other countries, killing those who oppose them, and there is zero threat.

Oh, I get it, those who fled the Tyrant have no right to stop a Tyrant, we must sit quietly and watch or relatives die.

The free people of the world should just huddle in the one sanctuary from death and murder, just hide here and ignore Communism's rise to power and control, because it can never hurt us, even if it grew and kept getting more and more powerful?

If the USA never fought Communism what would the world be today, most likely we would not have this discussion, your parents or yourself would of died in the war we would of fought to prevent Communism from taking over the USA.

Communist conquering the entire World was never a threat to freedom?

America has attacked and killed just as many as communist countries have, probably more.
Please explain why American tanks wading into countries, killing thousands, were better than communist tanks doing the same.
I'm sure America saved many Cambodians from being forced into communism...when it bombed civilians to hell (Without any declaration of war).

Better dead by an American bomb than forced into communism?
Please explain how Cambodian, Indonesian and so many other civilians were better off dead than potentially communist and how it is acceptable to bomb countries without declaring war and trying to hide the fact you did so.

In fact, America is a massive threat to the world and was always a greater threat than communism.
Basically, America invaded Vietnam, killed a load of its own people in a daft war and managed to kill thousands of local while it was doing so.

 

[Infidel]

The advantages of the Vietnam war.

Showed the US that they can't win without using nukes. Go big or go home. They went home.

 

[Indofred]

Not really.

The fight against communism took place on a dozen battlefields. Just because you lost one such incident does not mean that you didn't win the overall conflict. The west won in most of the other locations so even that line of logic really does not stand up.

How many communist nations attacked America and how many were attacked by America.
Given America suffered no loss of life and zero damage because there were no communist attacks on America, one has to question where the threat to people came from.

If you cant acknowledge the existence of the cold war or how superpowers war through small proxy nations then I cant fathom why you even bothered to ask the question.


You have your answer - you are not looking for debate as far as I can tell.

Of course there was a cold war, but please explain how going into Vietnam and other countries helped America.
The stupidity that we know as communism is self defeating because it's such as stupid, unworkable idea.

 

[Infidel]

How many communist nations attacked America and how many were attacked by America.
Given America suffered no loss of life and zero damage because there were no communist attacks on America, one has to question where the threat to people came from.

If you cant acknowledge the existence of the cold war or how superpowers war through small proxy nations then I cant fathom why you even bothered to ask the question.


You have your answer - you are not looking for debate as far as I can tell.

Of course there was a cold war, but please explain how going into Vietnam and other countries helped America.
The stupidity that we know as communism is self defeating because it's such as stupid, unworkable idea.

They were going to attack Indonesia, but they couldn't find anything worth attacking.

 

[Indofred]

The advantages of the Vietnam war.

Showed the US that they can't win without using nukes. Go big or go home. They went home.

I don't believe it did.
Had the American leaders learned any lessons - they wouldn't have repeated the mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There goes another two wars you could never win and were always guaranteed to seriously mess up, coming home with nothing but a massive bill and a load of dead bodies.

A win requires you to have gained in some way - Nothing was gained in Vietnam.

 

[Indofred]

If you cant acknowledge the existence of the cold war or how superpowers war through small proxy nations then I cant fathom why you even bothered to ask the question.


You have your answer - you are not looking for debate as far as I can tell.

Of course there was a cold war, but please explain how going into Vietnam and other countries helped America.
The stupidity that we know as communism is self defeating because it's such as stupid, unworkable idea.

They were going to attack Indonesia, but they couldn't find anything worth attacking.

Check your history. America murdered quite a few civilians in Indonesia.

 

[Infidel]

Of course there was a cold war, but please explain how going into Vietnam and other countries helped America.
The stupidity that we know as communism is self defeating because it's such as stupid, unworkable idea.

They were going to attack Indonesia, but they couldn't find anything worth attacking.

Check your history. America murdered quite a few civilians in Indonesia.

Which is how they knew there was nothing worthwhile to attack again.

 

[Friends]

Final declaration, dated July 21, 1954, of the Geneva Conference on the problem of restoring peace in Indochina, in which the representatives of Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, France, Laos, the People's Republic of China, the State of Viet-Nam, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom and the United States of America took part...

4. The Conference takes note of the clauses in the agreement on the cessation of hostilities in Viet-Nam prohibiting the introduction into Viet Nam of foreign troops and military personnel as well as of all kinds of arms and munitions...

6. The Conference recognizes that the essential purpose of the agreement relating to Viet-Nam is to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and that the military demarcation line should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary...

7. In order to insure that sufficient progress in the restoration of peace has been made, and that all the necessary conditions obtain for free expression of the national will, general elections shall be held in July 1956, under the supervision of an international commission composed of representatives of the member states of the International Supervisory Commission referred to in the agreement on the cessation of hostilities.
Modern History Sourcebook: The Final Declaration of The Geneva Conference: On Restoring Peace in Indochina, July 21, 1954


The United States did not sign and did not honor the Geneva Agreement of 1954. This is why: "I have never talked or corresponded with a person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the fighting, possibly 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader."

Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1953-56 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Compnay, Inc., 1963), p. 372
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam/ddeho.htm


The War in Vietnam happened because the United States prevented the ascension of a leader the vast majority of the Vietnamese wanted. The War in Vietnam was tragically futile. It was an expensive losing war fought with a tough resourceful enemy in which the rewards of victory and the penalties of defeat were imperceptible. Vietnam was unimportant to America's economy and to America's economy.

President Johnson sent American ground troops into Vietnam, but President Eisenhower got the United States involved in the first place.

 

[Indofred]

They were going to attack Indonesia, but they couldn't find anything worth attacking.

Check your history. America murdered quite a few civilians in Indonesia.

Which is how they knew there was nothing worthwhile to attack again.

Actually, you got busted in public so were forced to stop.
One of your murderers was shot down and, to save his own skin, kept all his ID and mission documents, against his standing orders.
I'm happy you think America murdering innocent Christian civilians, on their way home from church, is funny.
Personally, I think you're a silly fucker.

 

[editec]

I think the mistake many make in POLITICS is assuming that there is ONE motive for policies.

Generally policies that get passed get passed because it serves MANY masters.

The War in Viet Nam served many masters in America.

It was a complete and utter waste of this nations blood and gold. It tore the nation apart both by generation AND class, too.

It STARTED us down the road going from the world's wealthiest creditor nation to the worlds largest debtor nation.

Thank you very much Lyndon Johnson and later Richard Nixon.

Hopefully the Christians are right and you will both burn in hell for that war.

If your history of Vietnam starts with Johnson, not Kennedy, you do not know much about history.

A fair complaint
But my history doesn't.

The guilt for that WAR however DOES start with LBJ.

The real origin of the war starts before WWII, with French colonialism if you want to play that full history game.

But the war was expanded from a pittance force of advisors under Kennedy, to over 500,000 combat troops in country under Johnson.

It's probably that JFK would not have turned that war in what it became. It seems likely he'd have gotten us out instead of digging that hole deeper.

Hence my limiting the guilt to LBJ and RMN.

Do you disagree with my assessment about the WAR and our limited involvement UNTIL LBJ made it into the mess it became?

 

[Infidel]

Check your history. America murdered quite a few civilians in Indonesia.

Which is how they knew there was nothing worthwhile to attack again.

Actually, you got busted in public so were forced to stop.
One of your murderers was shot down and, to save his own skin, kept all his ID and mission documents, against his standing orders.
I'm happy you think America murdering innocent Christian civilians, on their way home from church, is funny.
Personally, I think you're a silly fucker.

No, you're just confused, we were talking about armies.

 

[racewright]

Those of us who served in Vietnam did not lose squat. We never lost a major battle. We just left. In 1969, the entire 3rd Marine Division went to Okinawa. As of March 29, 1973, all American Troops were gone from Vietnam.

I have no regrets and make no apologies for my combat service in Vietnam.

I suggest you read A VIETNCONG MEMOIR by Truong Nhu Tang and FOLLOWING HO CHI MINH by Bui Tin

It appears most of you experts were not yet born or too young to serve in Vietnam. Let us not forget the Socialists who dodged the draft.

How are people who dodged the draft for moral reasons Socialists?

They did not Dodge for moral reasons they were PUNKS

 

[racewright]

I think the mistake many make in POLITICS is assuming that there is ONE motive for policies.

Generally policies that get passed get passed because it serves MANY masters.

The War in Viet Nam served many masters in America.

It was a complete and utter waste of this nations blood and gold. It tore the nation apart both by generation AND class, too.

It STARTED us down the road going from the world's wealthiest creditor nation to the worlds largest debtor nation.

Thank you very much Lyndon Johnson and later Richard Nixon.

Hopefully the Christians are right and you will both burn in hell for that war.

If your history of Vietnam starts with Johnson, not Kennedy, you do not know much about history.

A fair complaint
But my history doesn't.

The guilt for that WAR however DOES start with LBJ.

The real origin of the war starts before WWII, with French colonialism if you want to play that full history game.

But the war was expanded from a pittance force of advisors under Kennedy, to over 500,000 combat troops in country under Johnson.

It's probably that JFK would not have turned that war in what it became. It seems likely he'd have gotten us out instead of digging that hole deeper.

Hence my limiting the guilt to LBJ and RMN.

Do you disagree with my assessment about the WAR and our limited involvement UNTIL LBJ made it into the mess it became?

LBJ was a egotistical scum bag who could give a shit about his fellow man and only about his overly large Texan Ego.
We always have to deal with politicians who cost American lives in some stupid foreign war that we should not be involved in, as the saying goes old men fight wars that young boys fight= screw that send the women and old politicians and you will see nuclear weapons going off.
If you have a reason to go to war then at least have the balls to win it and conquer the enemy.