Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't get what you're saying. So you're saying killing 4 million Vietnamese civilians, dropping countless bombs, agent-orange was justified??
Yeah, what did the Vietcong do ? Went on killing sprees 24/7. You bought right into that Communist propaganda. The people in Vietnam today would be much, much better off if they had nuked the Communists away.
You probably also think the U.S. should never have intervened in WW2.
Yeah, what did the Vietcong do ? Went on killing sprees 24/7. You bought right into that Communist propaganda. The people in Vietnam today would be much, much better off if they had nuked the Communists away.
You probably also think the U.S. should never have intervened in WW2.
Both sides committed atrocities, but there is simply no excuse for what America did, in the name of 'helping' South Vietnam. What about the fact most Vietnamese saw it as a war of liberation against a foreign power? The Americans were mainly in it because of a fear of the spread of Communism, just like almost every war from after WWI to the end of the Cold War they intervened in. Training and arming costas in Nicaragua that butchered countless people, supporting all these fascist dictators and training the Taliban. So you think they were the good guys then?
That's a separate issue. Of course I think it was necessary for the US to enter WWII. Talk about drawing conclusions.
The PRC's handling of the South China Sea dispute might prove to be a huge blunder. It's digging itself into a diplomatic hole. SE Asian nations should be natural partners for the PRC, especially Vietnam. The PRC could've taken the initiative and provided leadership in coming to an amicable resolution to the dispute (and build something it lacks, soft power), but they're resorting to obfuscation, flat out bullying, and a winner-take-all mindset. This has provided Japan and the US a diplomatic inlet into the dispute.
The PRC seems to be a great student of its own history and making claims based off old maps, but they seem to be awfully unaware of the diplomatic consequences of aggressive unilateral action.
The PRC's handling of the South China Sea dispute might prove to be a huge blunder. It's digging itself into a diplomatic hole. SE Asian nations should be natural partners for the PRC, especially Vietnam. The PRC could've taken the initiative and provided leadership in coming to an amicable resolution to the dispute (and build something it lacks, soft power), but they're resorting to obfuscation, flat out bullying, and a winner-take-all mindset. This has provided Japan and the US a diplomatic inlet into the dispute.
The PRC seems to be a great student of its own history and making claims based off old maps, but they seem to be awfully unaware of the diplomatic consequences of aggressive unilateral action.
Most of the current Chinese leaders are not very politically polished (understatement) by any standard. They don't have a good foresight on how to acquire a soft power. Their lips services does not cut any mustard. They sow the seeds of nationalism to their own people to cover up their constant insecurity and reap the backlash from the international communities. IMO, they couldn't careless about the world opinion. They want to be a superpower but are not willing to compromise to build political goodwill. They want the world to respect them, but somehow failed to realize the common fact: To get respect one has to earn it.
Both sides committed atrocities, but there is simply no excuse for what America did, in the name of 'helping' South Vietnam. What about the fact most Vietnamese saw it as a war of liberation against a foreign power? The Americans were mainly in it because of a fear of the spread of Communism, just like almost every war from after WWI to the end of the Cold War they intervened in. Training and arming costas in Nicaragua that butchered countless people, supporting all these fascist dictators and training the Taliban. So you think they were the good guys then?
That's a separate issue. Of course I think it was necessary for the US to enter WWII. Talk about drawing conclusions.
Of course. And the U.S. should have never gotten involved in WW2 and let Nazi-Germany kill even more people. Makes sense, dosen't it?
War of liberation ? According to who ? North Vietnamese? The propaganda term the government coined?
Most people there hate the Communists and would have been thrilled if someone had thrown them out. War means sacrifices. War means people will be killed... Why even single out the U.S. ? So we are gonna cry about all the Nazis that were killed in WW2 !? You should be glad someone was willing to help.
WW2 was no different. In both cases it was essential that the U.S. got involved. But Vietnam was given up, sadly... and people suffer to this day...every single day.
They treat Vietnamese like s h i t, deprive them of basic human rights, censor everything and anything, throw people in jail for no reason, terrorize the population etc. The list is long.
I dont think that the people actually suffering to the extent that you have mentioned, i mean communism is horrible, but vietnam is totally not north korea where they actually do all those horrible things to the level of extrememism.
I think the reds should kill each other. they're both authoritarian regimes. never trust a communist! They're were rumours that exxon had oil contracts around the area with vietnam. That's why the red dragon moved in all of a sudden.
Of course. And the U.S. should have never gotten involved in WW2 and let Nazi-Germany kill even more people. Makes sense, dosen't it?
War of liberation ? According to who ? North Vietnamese? The propaganda term the government coined?
Most people there hate the Communists and would have been thrilled if someone had thrown them out. War means sacrifices. War means people will be killed... Why even single out the U.S. ? So we are gonna cry about all the Nazis that were killed in WW2 !? You should be glad someone was willing to help.
WW2 was no different. In both cases it was essential that the U.S. got involved. But Vietnam was given up, sadly... and people suffer to this day...every single day.
They treat Vietnamese like s h i t, deprive them of basic human rights, censor everything and anything, throw people in jail for no reason, terrorize the population etc. The list is long.
You have no clues what you're talking about. We may be communist, but we are nothing like the Chinese, we are more like the Russians. And you don't use nukes unless it's a last resort. [Mod cut: rude!!]
Is this really the US's problem? What does it really matter if Vietnam falls to the Chinese hegemony? It seems like the US ended up vanquishing one foe in WWII to replace it with another. To be honest maybe the US should withdraw from Asia since it seems to be impossible for them to ever achieve hegemony there. They got rid of Imperial Japan and replaced them with Communist China and I highly doubt a democratic China would be pro Western or pro American so why bother?
I agree Obama's Asia policy is a complete failure. Promoted more trouble than anything else.
I agree Obama's Asia policy is a complete failure. Promoted more trouble than anything else.
What Obama Asian policy? What more trouble? Like, Obama is able to actually control the direction of what's been historically the largest and most powerful country in the world for pretty large but intermittent runs?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.