|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth


Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Small question for P&L
#5338916 - 02/25/06 07:26 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
What do you think is the reason we lost the war in Vietnam 63-73? Its a small question but i just want to see what peoples views on this are.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs



Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 11 days
|
|
We pulled out because of US public opinion of the war was going to the shitters.
|
beatnicknick
The Innovator


Registered: 05/25/05
Posts: 1,074
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
|
"Had they not brought down Nixon, we wouldn't have lost Vietnam." -Rush Limbaugh
Funny, I know.
The not funny thing is that this guy is convinced of what he's saying and what our president says.
-------------------- I don't think for myself. I think as though I'm explaining my thoughts to someone else. I'm concerned only for those listening.
Edited by beatnicknick (02/25/06 07:35 PM)
|
ACN45
Stranger
Registered: 11/28/05
Posts: 160
Last seen: 17 years, 9 months
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: Redstorm]
#5338939 - 02/25/06 07:33 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
We didnt lose the war in vietnam because the media focused on the negatives and public support went way down which forced us to pull out which a lot of people seem to think. South Vietnam could have held its own without our troops, but not without our money. Russia and china gave billions of dollars to north vietnam after the war while the US decided to cut and run. If the us would have continued just alittle support there would be a north and south vietnam today.
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth


Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: Redstorm]
#5338944 - 02/25/06 07:34 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: We pulled out because of US public opinion of the war was going to the shitters.
Agreed, however also one of the deciding factors in losing vietnam was two words, Hearts and Minds.
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth


Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: ACN45]
#5338949 - 02/25/06 07:36 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ACN45 said: We didnt lose the war in vietnam because the media focused on the negatives and public support went way down which forced us to pull out which a lot of people seem to think. South Vietnam could have held its own without our troops, but not without our money. Russia and china gave billions of dollars to north vietnam after the war while the US decided to cut and run. If the us would have continued just alittle support there would be a north and south vietnam today.
I dont think China would give Vietnam money or aid considering those 2 fought a war that killed millions of people.
The fact of the matter was when we got to Vietnam the VC and NVA had already been fighting wars for itleast 30 years(and even longer then that.)
|
Silversoul
Rhizome


Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
|
Guerilla warfare is a highly effective way to beat a larger, more heavily armed enemy. It can help achieve long-term victory even in the face of many defeats in battle. Add to that the fact that we often didn't know who the enemy was. And as you said, there is the issue of the hearts and minds of the people. As for the media coverage, I think the main point it brought home was how unwinnable that war was. Sadly, I see many of the same elements today in Iraq.
--------------------
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth


Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: Silversoul]
#5339060 - 02/25/06 08:10 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Paradigm said: Guerilla warfare is a highly effective way to beat a larger, more heavily armed enemy. It can help achieve long-term victory even in the face of many defeats in battle. Add to that the fact that we often didn't know who the enemy was. And as you said, there is the issue of the hearts and minds of the people. As for the media coverage, I think the main point it brought home was how unwinnable that war was. Sadly, I see many of the same elements today in Iraq.
Ding Ding we have a winner. Tell him what he wins Shanda.
|
gluke bastid
Stinky Bum


Registered: 12/20/00
Posts: 3,322
Loc: Charm City
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: Silversoul]
#5339147 - 02/25/06 08:30 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Paradigm said: Guerilla warfare is a highly effective way to beat a larger, more heavily armed enemy. It can help achieve long-term victory even in the face of many defeats in battle. Add to that the fact that we often didn't know who the enemy was. And as you said, there is the issue of the hearts and minds of the people. As for the media coverage, I think the main point it brought home was how unwinnable that war was. Sadly, I see many of the same elements today in Iraq.
When you are fighting a sentiment or ideology it becomes very difficult to imagine what a victory would actually be like. We wanted to defeat North Vietnam, but not destroy it, just make it into a democracy. That goal is part of the reason we didn't win.
--------------------
Society in every form is a blessing, but government at its best is but a necessary evil - Thomas Paine
|
Phluck
Carpal Tunnel


Registered: 04/10/99
Posts: 11,394
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 3 months, 6 days
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: Redstorm]
#5339613 - 02/25/06 10:39 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: We pulled out because of US public opinion of the war was going to the shitters.
This is kind of a silly answer. Public opinions doesn't just go to shit on its own. There have to be reasons for that.
There are a bunch of reasons too, but like Paradigm pointed out, one of the biggest was the fact americans weren't succeeding. Guerilla warfare was not something they were prepared for.
Like anything, there's no single straightforward answer. You've got to look at why the war started in the first place, who supported it then, and pretty much all the facts you can find. It's like that Simpson's episode:
Proctor: All right, here's your last question. What was the cause of the Civil War? Apu: Actually, there were numerous causes. Aside from the obvious schism between the abolitionists and the anti-abolitionists, there were economic factors, both domestic and inter-- Proctor: Wait, wait... just say slavery. Apu: Slavery it is, sir.
-------------------- "I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson http://phluck.is-after.us
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs



Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 11 days
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: Phluck]
#5339646 - 02/25/06 10:44 PM (17 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I don't believe it is a silly answer at all. It is at the core of why we left. Early in the war, there was huge media and public support for the war due to a tight-lipped administration and out-right falsifications of what was actually going on over there. Once the media realized the shit they were being fed was nowhere near the truth, they began to report more independently of gov't sources. This cynicism led to a greater disapproval of the war by the citizens, which made the politicians use getting out as a political vehicle. No politician wants it to look like he is supporting an unpopular war.
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 10 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
The_Red_Crayon said: What do you think is the reason we lost the war in Vietnam 63-73? Its a small question but i just want to see what peoples views on this are.
You're asking the wrong question. A better one is: How could America have won the Vietnam War?
All we were doing was staving off the north's takeover of the south. There was never a way to "win" in any sense of the word by the way we fighting. The american government was never prepared to win the war. We could have won but it would not have been pretty and china would not have been happy.
This is where i notice the similarity between vietnam and iraq. All halfassing a job does is get us into trouble.
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
wilshire
free radical


Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 14 years, 3 days
|
|
the u.s. didn't lose the vietnam war.
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth


Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Small question for P&L [Re: wilshire]
#5342899 - 02/26/06 08:46 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
wilshire said: the u.s. didn't lose the vietnam war.
Of course, it was just not won.
|
|