Vietnam War was unwinnable

[harmonica]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

 

[harmonica]

y

..the US was involved with Vietnam for over 7 years!!!!!

The U.S. Marines landed in Da Nang in 1845. Your idea that our involvement was 7 years is woefully short. I would say your comment is pure ignorance. One of many comments you made that shows you never learned or educated yourself on Vietnam.

It has been fun showing you to be a monkey in a cage of ignorance. I may stop by from time to time to rub your nose in .......... Bad monkey, bad, bad, bad, monkey.

In 1845 I doubt there were more than five hundred members of the US Marines in total. That's not much of an invasion force.

yet, in 1845 the Marines were in Viet-nam.

and? your point? that is not relevant to the Vietnam War

 

[JGalt]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

 

[harmonica]

..and Britain was in Europe many times before 1943---what a dumbass statement by elektra

Yes, the USA's involvement in Viet-Nam was far more than 7 years. Our first involvement was well over a 100 years before Viet-Nam war. Your statement about over 7 years of involvement simply shows your ignorance on this topic. You believed our involvement was so short you could not even think you should look it up. At the very least we were up to our necks as early as 1954 through 1973? At least 19 years. Then again Truman began our assistance as early as 1947, can I say 26 years of involvement?

100 years!!!!!!!!!??? hahahhahahahaha
it started in 1955 with the French ...use a calculator next time

 

[harmonica]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

sure--that's right--it was unwinnable.....but we did not attain our objective--so, it really was a loss......
...50,000 lives lost is a loss

 

[JGalt]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

sure--that's right--it was unwinnable.....but we did not attain our objective--so, it really was a loss......
...50,000 lives lost is a loss

Ok Cronkite.

 

[harmonica]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

sure--that's right--it was unwinnable.....but we did not attain our objective--so, it really was a loss......
...50,000 lives lost is a loss

Ok Cronkite.

Cronkite was the reason we lost the war!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAH

 

[JGalt]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

sure--that's right--it was unwinnable.....but we did not attain our objective--so, it really was a loss......
...50,000 lives lost is a loss

Ok Cronkite.

Cronkite was the reason we lost the war!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAH

Media personalities are there to to report the news, not to shape public opinion. You yourself know that it's x1000 worse today than it was back then...

 

[lg325]

The objective was to stop communism from taking over the entire area of south east Asia. So we did achieve our objective. And I agree capitalism is alive and well there but not democracy. Its not what those that fought for the north side signed up for. The goverment will have another peoples revolt on there hands if there seen as selling out. I belive any fight against communism is a noble cause. I am proud of my uncles service there.

 

[Dick Foster]

..we are talking REALITY--not nuking anyone....not invading the north like the Russians and US did to Germany --that wasn't going to happen--even if they did invade the North, they couldn't stay there forever.....
..first--the French lost--and after we gave them MILLIONS$ and with all their '''advantages'' ....this should've been a lesson
......a big problem was the Vietnamese government [ and military ] = for a long time it was corrupt/unstable/etc = they had 3 heads of state changes in less than 2 years--one with a MURDER..with many attempted coups before and after......that mess was still there after Thieu took over
...N Vietnam did not have to even beat the US ......
.......the US could cut off Korea because it was peninsula--where as NV could bring troops/etc to the South over land
.

You can't win a war where the people are fighting for national freedom. Besides we were on the wrong side from the get go. Ho approach the US for help first as far back as Woodrow Wilson at the end of WWI. He even wrote his constitution based on our own. But no we had to side with the fucking frog imperialists. The only reason he went to the commies is because they were the only ones who would help him kick the fucking frogs out of their country.

 

[harmonica]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

sure--that's right--it was unwinnable.....but we did not attain our objective--so, it really was a loss......
...50,000 lives lost is a loss

Ok Cronkite.

Cronkite was the reason we lost the war!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAH

Media personalities are there to to report the news, not to shape public opinion. You yourself know that it's x1000 worse today than it was back then...

Russia lost in Afghanistan
the French lost in ''Vietnam''
the US lost in Vietnam
--and you bring up the media!!!!!????

 

[mudwhistle]

Even though the cost was high, we did win in a way. Vietnam seems to have become more capitalist over the years. They manufacture alot of the stuff sold in Walmart, and they've become a tourist attraction.

I mean, compared to North Korea.

You mean they are a source of cheap labor? How did we win anything?

I could imagine the Vietnam vet grumbling about Vietnamese stuff in walmart when he can't find a good job, just like the WWII vets grumbled about Volkwagens and Toyotas in the 1970's... while watching American Plants close.

Here's a crazy idea... let's make sure when we "Win", it's a win for the working class, not the rich.

OK then. Next time we'll just nuke them.

We dropped more bombs on them than we did in WWII

Then it must have worked, seeing as how they're now a trading partner.

It cost millions of Vietnamese lives and 60,000 Americans to get what we could have gotten for nothing

Hey....what do you expect from a Democrat president.
They start wars.....people who sell weapons get rich.

 

[rightwinger]

The objective was to stop communism from taking over the entire area of south east Asia. So we did achieve our objective. And I agree capitalism is alive and well there but not democracy. Its not what those that fought for the north side signed up for. The goverment will have another peoples revolt on there hands if there seen as selling out. I belive any fight against communism is a noble cause. I am proud of my uncles service there.

The people in Vietnam are better off today than they were under French Colonial Rule

 

[rightwinger]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

sure--that's right--it was unwinnable.....but we did not attain our objective--so, it really was a loss......
...50,000 lives lost is a loss

Ok Cronkite.

Cronkite was the reason we lost the war!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHAH

Media personalities are there to to report the news, not to shape public opinion. You yourself know that it's x1000 worse today than it was back then...

The media deceived us for seven years and parroted whatever propaganda they were being fed by the Pentagon.

They finally grew tired of the victory is right around the corner and the nobility of our motives and started to report the true picture.

 

[Desperado]

..and Britain was in Europe many times before 1943---what a dumbass statement by elektra

Yes, the USA's involvement in Viet-Nam was far more than 7 years. Our first involvement was well over a 100 years before Viet-Nam war. Your statement about over 7 years of involvement simply shows your ignorance on this topic. You believed our involvement was so short you could not even think you should look it up. At the very least we were up to our necks as early as 1954 through 1973? At least 19 years. Then again Truman began our assistance as early as 1947, can I say 26 years of involvement?

Why? we had no business being there

 

[Desperado]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

Well we were pushing hueys off aircraft carriers and that is not something winners do. Face it we lost that war

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

I think the Vietnam War was was mostly about enriching the US Military industrial Complex

But think about it.......with our overwhelming military resources.....if we couldn't win Vietnam......are we smart to be poking China?

 

[JGalt]

We were winning. The Cong was being wiped out. Then liberal Walter Cronkite went to Viet Nam and lied. He was the most trusted name in news and he lied. We had won the Tet Offensive with a resounding and decisive victory. Cronkite said it was a rout. A humiliating defeat. Ho Chi Minh realized he didn't have to win. Hang on and the American left would do what his army could not. Defeat our military.

....hang on for how long? the US couldn't stay there forever....
..it would be just like Afghanistan and Iraq - no win

Hang on until the American left did what war did not do. Win the war which is exactly what happened.

Well the gooks gooks did turn into little capitalists, as opposed to being another shithole like North Korea. I've seen lots of stuff in stores that was marked "Made in Vietnam."

Looks like all that bombing did the little bastards some good, just like it did Germany and Japan.

We showed them.

at the cost of over 50,000 American lives--that really showed them---and we fked ourselves--YES--now we are competing with them !!!!!

It could have cost far more than that, had they ended up like the NORKs and developed a nuke.

I messed up--it should read 50,000 WASTED American lives

As well as 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. But that never gets mentioned, does it?

......?? your point?

My point is that we did not "lose" the Vietnam War. I will never acquiesce to that fallacy..

Well we were pushing hueys off aircraft carriers and that is not something winners do. Face it we lost that war

The helicopters were pushed off the carrier to allow a South Vietnamese Major, his wife, and five children to land a Cessna, that was almost out of fuel. The Hueys had already served their purpose of evacuating American troops and Vietnamese, and it was the USS Midway commander's prerogative to do that...

Lawrence Chambers - Wikipedia

Equipment is expendable, allies who fought along side us aren't.

 

[Moonglow]

..we are talking REALITY--not nuking anyone....not invading the north like the Russians and US did to Germany --that wasn't going to happen--even if they did invade the North, they couldn't stay there forever.....
..first--the French lost--and after we gave them MILLIONS$ and with all their '''advantages'' ....this should've been a lesson
......a big problem was the Vietnamese government [ and military ] = for a long time it was corrupt/unstable/etc = they had 3 heads of state changes in less than 2 years--one with a MURDER..with many attempted coups before and after......that mess was still there after Thieu took over
...N Vietnam did not have to even beat the US ......
.......the US could cut off Korea because it was peninsula--where as NV could bring troops/etc to the South over land
.

Static warfare rarely succeeds for the established power...

 

[Dayton3]

I think the Vietnam War was was mostly about enriching the US Military industrial Complex

Who was enriched by Vietnam War?