Which do you think was the most pointless war, WWI or Vietnam? (empire, France)
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.
From the point of view of the United States? The Vietnam War. Simply put, there were more compelling American interests at stake in World War I than in the Vietnam War.
After all, in Vietnam the overriding American interest - stopping the communists from rolling up the rest of SE Asia after they got South Vietnam - never happened even though they did get South Vietnam. The Soviet Union went out of business, and we have normalized relations with Vietnam and do tens of billions of dollars of trade with them annually. In other words, things seem to have worked out pretty well despite the war's failure.
This is not to say that American interests in World War I were tremendous - but they were certainly more significant in comparison to those of the Vietnam War.
Frankly, I completely agree with everything that you wrote here.
Vietnam was a war of national independence, people wanting to be free from colonial rule and oppression. I can understand that, that makes sense. That is something worth fighting and dying for. It mad no sense for the United States to fight a war to end the very thing that brought it into being, self rule, self determination the idea of self-governance.
Completely agreed. Indeed, as far as I know, in spite of his Communist beliefs, Ho Chi Minh was apparently willing to work with the U.S. and only became very close with the Soviet Union as a result of necessity due to him having to fight the U.S.
I agree. I have never understood why the Europeans got into WW I, either, except that they hadn't had a general war in a century and felt it was time to do something with all the arms, wealth, and spare population available. I find the excuses that Wilson and the Anglophiles used to con the US into participating to be flimsy and unconvincing at best, probably greedy and ethnocentric at worst.
For what it's worth, it appears that some German politicians and military officials believed that a war with both France and Russia was inevitable for Germany and that thus Germany should fight this war sooner rather than later (because waiting to fight helps France and Russia).
I have pretty much said the same thing on other threads, although I think the true total of Americans killed was over 1,000 (there were other ships sunk by the Germans besides RMS Lusitania). Regardless, to avenge those 1,000 civilians, we lost over 100,000 young soldiers.
So from the American perspective, WW1 was more pointless. At least Vietnam has some kind of rationale, the communist domino effect.
Actually, there is another rationale for the U.S.'s entry into World War I--the desire to prevent Germany from dominating over most of Europe and the desire to have Britain and France pay back the loans that they previously got from the U.S.
Quote:
I would argue from the British POV, WW1 could have turned out more pointless as well, if Russia did not collapse in 1917 and the Franco-Russian Alliance did not end. People forget that in 1914, Britain sided with her traditional enemies, France and Russia, against her traditional allies, Germany (Prussia) and Austria.
Had the Russians not fallen in 1917 and the Franco-Russian alliance lasted into the post war era, Britain could have been faced with a powerful alliance, this time without the traditional Germanic powers to balance against it.
I am unsure that France would have actually wanted to be hostile towards Britain in such a scenario, though. After all, France would want all of the help that it could get in the event that Germany will regain its strength. Thus, what is probably more likely is having France try to balance its relations with Britain and Russia but to have a pro-Russian lean/tilt.
Vietnam could have been avoided with a bit of diplomacy. Ho Chi Minh didn't start as a communist. The US armed him to help in the fight against the Japanese. After the war, Vietnam wasn't given her independence, she was handed back to France. The US was not about to back Ho Chi Minh against France even as the Communists were spreading through China. If the US wouldn't back him, the Communists were more than happy to take up the fight. Vietnam could have been an American ally, but America chose to protect France's colonial interests instead.
The US should have fought France on the side of Ho?
Why fight France, though? After all, France was indebted to us after the end of World War II. Indeed, one might even be able to argue that France was the U.S.'s "biitch" right after the end of World War II!
So, in other words, you have no problem with Taliban rule in Afghanistan if they don't support terrorism even if most Afghans oppose Taliban rule--correct?
There are equally bad parties running a number of other Mideast and Central Asian countries, and the US has not tried to change the control of those countries under either Bush or Obama. The difference in Afghanistan is that the Taliban created a safe haven for Al Qaeda.
There are equally bad parties running a number of other Mideast and Central Asian countries, and the US has not tried to change the control of those countries under either Bush or Obama. The difference in Afghanistan is that the Taliban created a safe haven for Al Qaeda.
The Taliban's level of extremism appears to have been unique even for the Middle East, though. Indeed, as far as I know, the Taliban essentially outlawed modern technology when they ruled Afghanistan. Of course, considering that the Taliban currently have a Twitter account, perhaps even they are changing in regards to this.
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.
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.
