The advantages of the Vietnam war.

[Delta4Embassy]

I'm having a little trouble trying to work out why America went into Vietnam.
I was assured it was to save the democratic world from the evil communist threat but, regardless of the reasons for it, you lost and went home.
After that withdrawal, there was no change at all in the world order.

Given that, can anyone explain why the United States went to Vietnam, spent a massive pile of your taxpayers' money, and killed a load of your own people?

Confirmed asymmetric warfare can repel even technologically superior forces. As it did again in Iraq and Afganistan. Like to think we'll learn the lesson at some point.

 

[Indofred]

We could have very easily won.


Now look at all the decisions of what not to do that were made.

no crossing boarders
no bombing in cities
etc, etc

These decisions dragged out the war, and the leaders knew it. So the only logical conclusion is that it was intentional

no crossing boarders - please explain the carpet bombing of Cambodia.

Please explain why you are so determined to discuss a subject you know so little about.

We carpet bombed those portions of Cambodia already occupied by the North Vietnamese. Someone actually familiar with the subject will have heard of the Ho Chi Minh trail.

and Laos?

Most of the U.S. bombing of these countries was a waste of time from a military standpoint but killed thousands of unarmed civilians in your attempt to terrorise the people of a country you weren't at war with from joining the people trying to defend their country from an invading force.
Someone killed 3,000 civilians in the twin towers attacks and America went ape shit.
America murdered many more and your government tried to cover it up and no one has ever been so much as investigated, much less convicted.
Please explain why killing civilians is wrong but killing civilians is right.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Saving Vietnam from communism is like saving Indonesia from islam, like, who fucking cares?

I do. Far too many good people gave far too much to keep that from happening. Betrayal of the ARVNs was also betrayal of those who fought there at our behest.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Can't prevent a political ideology from taking hold somewhere. And killing people to try and prevent it only ensures it'll happen.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Important to understand what invading another country does to its people. Ask yourselves how well you'd think of an invading force on American soil, bombing our cities, destroying our towns then telling us how great a dictatorship is. If that doesn't sound like something that'd convince you, why expect it to work somewhere else?

 

[9thIDdoc]

no crossing boarders - please explain the carpet bombing of Cambodia.

Please explain why you are so determined to discuss a subject you know so little about.

We carpet bombed those portions of Cambodia already occupied by the North Vietnamese. Someone actually familiar with the subject will have heard of the Ho Chi Minh trail.

and Laos?

Most of the U.S. bombing of these countries was a waste of time from a military standpoint but killed thousands of unarmed civilians in your attempt to terrorise the people of a country you weren't at war with from joining the people trying to defend their country from an invading force.
Someone killed 3,000 civilians in the twin towers attacks and America went ape shit.
America murdered many more and your government tried to cover it up and no one has ever been so much as investigated, much less convicted.
Please explain why killing civilians is wrong but killing civilians is right.

Get a freakin map! And a clue! The Ho Chi Minh trail with it's attendant supply, training and staging areas also ran through Thailand and Laos. At no time was the target of our bombing was the civilians of those countries.
While wagging war there is no doubt that some civilians are killed. Wandering around a battle field is an unhealthy habit. But we did not, and do not target, them whereas Islamic terrorists consider them the prime target. That's a HUGH difference whether you think so or not.

 

[gipper]

Saving Vietnam from communism is like saving Indonesia from islam, like, who fucking cares?

I do. Far too many good people gave far too much to keep that from happening. Betrayal of the ARVNs was also betrayal of those who fought there at our behest.

I like to believe that most Americans honor the sacrifices made by American fighting men in Vietnam. Most of whom did not want to be there, but were drafted.

However, I despise the political leadership who got us into that war and most of America's wars.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Important to understand what invading another country does to its people. Ask yourselves how well you'd think of an invading force on American soil, bombing our cities, destroying our towns then telling us how great a dictatorship is. If that doesn't sound like something that'd convince you, why expect it to work somewhere else?

Exactly. And the North Vietnamese were the invading force in Vietnam.

 

[Indofred]

Saving Vietnam from communism is like saving Indonesia from islam, like, who fucking cares?

Actually, if you care to read up on American terrorist history, you bombed Indonesia to save it from communism.
The most notable American terrorist bombing was murdering a load of Christians on their way home from church.

This isn't a tin foil hat job; it's recorded history, admitted by the American government.
As usual, you didn't charge any of your terrorists with any offence.

 

[GibsonSG]

Saving Vietnam from communism is like saving Indonesia from islam, like, who fucking cares?

Actually, if you care to read up on American terrorist history, you bombed Indonesia to save it from communism.
The most notable American terrorist bombing was murdering a load of Christians on their way home from church.

This isn't a tin foil hat job; it's recorded history, admitted by the American government.
As usual, you didn't charge any of your terrorists with any offence.

Bombing Indonesia isn't criminal because there's nothing there of any value anyways, so it's like bombing a pile of shit: nobody cares.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Saving Vietnam from communism is like saving Indonesia from islam, like, who fucking cares?

Actually, if you care to read up on American terrorist history, you bombed Indonesia to save it from communism.
The most notable American terrorist bombing was murdering a load of Christians on their way home from church.

This isn't a tin foil hat job; it's recorded history, admitted by the American government.
As usual, you didn't charge any of your terrorists with any offence.

Bombing Indonesia isn't criminal because there's nothing there of any value anyways, so it's like bombing a pile of shit: nobody cares.

The people who live there care and their fellow human beings care about them.

And, the US obviously cares or they wouldn't have bombed it.

Why did we spend millions to destroy "nothing"?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Same advantage as every other war: field test new weapons, get experience for combat forces. If we never went to war we'd have all zero-experience troops and unproven weapons systems.

And what a tragedy that would be.

We're bullies. We care nothing about human rights or dead children. Fetuses, yes, children, no.

We haven't gone to war for a just cause since WWII and probably never will again. We just beat up on countries who can't fight back, go into debt and kill millions of people.

Does anyone believe we would have gone into Kuwait if their main export had been broccoli? That's a reference to the president of the time saying he hated broccoli. That's the same president whose fortune is thanks to the bin Laden family his son protected later.

 

[GibsonSG]

Actually, if you care to read up on American terrorist history, you bombed Indonesia to save it from communism.
The most notable American terrorist bombing was murdering a load of Christians on their way home from church.

This isn't a tin foil hat job; it's recorded history, admitted by the American government.
As usual, you didn't charge any of your terrorists with any offence.

Bombing Indonesia isn't criminal because there's nothing there of any value anyways, so it's like bombing a pile of shit: nobody cares.

The people who live there care and their fellow human beings care about them.

And, the US obviously cares or they wouldn't have bombed it.

Why did we spend millions to destroy "nothing"?

Target practise.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Bombing Indonesia isn't criminal because there's nothing there of any value anyways, so it's like bombing a pile of shit: nobody cares.

The people who live there care and their fellow human beings care about them.

And, the US obviously cares or they wouldn't have bombed it.

Why did we spend millions to destroy "nothing"?

Target practise.

And the people who voted for these wars have the nerve to say they care about the very few people killed by drones.

 

[Flopper]

It's progressive policy in action.

Before Pres Wilson, we were isolationist and had a policy of not getting involved in other peoples wars or lives.

But evil won, so the progs sent us to die in WW1. And b/c we went to WW1, WW2 happened, which caused the Cold war, and that lead to Korea, VN, Pay of pigs, Cuban missile crisis and every other conflict we've gotten into.


Now sit back and imagine a people that cause the deaths of millions of people, calling another group warmongers.

The US could not and would not remain an isolationist nation. Wall Street would not have allowed it. Most of the wars fraught since the beginning of the 20th century have been to protect American interest in the region which translates into American business interests and defense treaties to protect those interest.

uhhuh

Lets put this myth to some thought shall we;

You are an American business man making widgits and are trying to sell your widgits in England, but are having a hard time b/c of and English company also makes widgits.

War breaks out and your plant, in England is in danger, but ALL of his plants are in danger.

Do you;
A) demand the government save your one plant
B) Sit back, let your competition get blown to bits and lose all their money then move in and take over the widgit market

Good Point but it's really more complicated than that. Those English companies making widget may have mostly US ownership and the English widget maker may be owned by the Germans, Americans, and Swiss. And so it goes throughout the world, business activity and ownership is global. Saber rattling in Lower Slobbovia, brings out business interest around the world demanding stability be restored to the region.

 

[Desperado]

Betrayal of the ARVNs was also betrayal of those who fought there at our behest.

Don't you have that backward? We were there at the request of the Army of the Republic of Viet Nam (ARVN) They were not there at our request.

 

[Friends]

Pure fantasy. If 80% of the population had favored Uncle Ho there would have been no mass migration south of people willing to leave everything behind to avoid his rule. There actually would have been a mass uprising in support of the Tet offensive. The North Vietnam Easter-Apr. '72- offensive would have been welcomed with open arms as there were no US ground combat units remaining in-country. Instead the communist invasion was soundly defeated by the ARVNs you are trying to claim actually supported Ho. Fantasy.

On all three fronts of the offensive, initial North Vietnamese successes were hampered by high casualties, inept tactics, and the increasing application of U.S. and South Vietnamese air power. One result of the offensive was the launching of Operation Linebacker II, the first sustained bombing of North Vietnam by the U.S. since November 1968.
Easter Offensive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Without American air support the offensive would have succeeded. 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

You are trying to claim that speculation about what others might speculate about an election that never took place reveals something about an offensive that would not take place for almost 20yrs.? Seriously? Good luck with that. But, sadly, fact trumps imagination every time and the North got their butts kicked by those you claim sympathized with them. You might also note that at An Loc the North deliberately slaughtered a couple hundred civilians. Bad PR.

The most important fact here is that President Johnson estimated that nearly 80 percent of the Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh. Another important fact is that Vietnam was unimportant to our security and economy. We should never have gotten involved.

 

[Flopper]

On all three fronts of the offensive, initial North Vietnamese successes were hampered by high casualties, inept tactics, and the increasing application of U.S. and South Vietnamese air power. One result of the offensive was the launching of Operation Linebacker II, the first sustained bombing of North Vietnam by the U.S. since November 1968.
Easter Offensive - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Without American air support the offensive would have succeeded. 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

You are trying to claim that speculation about what others might speculate about an election that never took place reveals something about an offensive that would not take place for almost 20yrs.? Seriously? Good luck with that. But, sadly, fact trumps imagination every time and the North got their butts kicked by those you claim sympathized with them. You might also note that at An Loc the North deliberately slaughtered a couple hundred civilians. Bad PR.

The most important fact here is that President Johnson estimated that nearly 80 percent of the Vietnamese supported Ho Chi Minh. Another important fact is that Vietnam was unimportant to our security and economy. We should never have gotten involved.

In retrospect, you're absolutely correct but remember attitudes in 60's were far different than today. In 1962, when a fleet of Soviet war ships were steaming toward Cuba and the president announced a blockade, a line was drawn in sand that everyone understood. TV news programs were showing the US cities that were possible target for nuclear missiles. Those that had bought bomb shelters in 50's were glad they did. Just one year latter the president was assassinated by Oswald, a Soviet sympathizer and defector. Russian influence in Africa and the far east was growing. In eastern Europe hundreds of Russian divisions were poised for attack. In short, people were scared on both sides. The cold war was just minutes from becoming very hot. Standing firm against the communist in Viet Nam seem to make sense till it became clear that Americans had no stomach for the type war Viet Nam was turning into.

 

[GibsonSG]

The people who live there care and their fellow human beings care about them.

And, the US obviously cares or they wouldn't have bombed it.

Why did we spend millions to destroy "nothing"?

Target practise.

And the people who voted for these wars have the nerve to say they care about the very few people killed by drones.

I don't, I think drones are awesome!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Target practise.

And the people who voted for these wars have the nerve to say they care about the very few people killed by drones.

I don't, I think drones are awesome!

I don't like that we kill people but I'd much rather it be a few instead of an all-out war that kills hundreds of thousands of innocent people and puts us into bankruptcy.

Drones have changed the world. Putin blusters and beats up young women but you can bet he watches the skies.