U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2019, 01:30 PM
 
Location: San José, CA
3,265 posts, read 5,788,317 times
Reputation: 3202

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKM View Post
South Korea would have about half as many people and my Korean friends would not even exist.

Communism likely would have spread further than Vietnam, killing far more people than the war there did.

Saddam or his sons would still be killing, in control of Kuwait and likely would have started a larger war in the ME.

Its hard to say really what other wars would have occurred if we just "stayed out". I am surprised at the number of people ignorant to the stability the US has brought to the world since 1945.
You can't have it both ways. You're accepting a fact of American intervention, but then declaring how bad it would have been if we hadn't intervened a second time. Saddam wouldn't have been the leader of Iraq without the U.S. and wouldn't have been strengthened without U.S. reward in an effort to weaken Iran. And to add irony into this, the Iran they hoped to weaken was the Iran that the people revolted against because we had previous removed their democratically-elected President in favor of a brutal tyrant.

So, yeah, sorry, but it doesn't work like this. You're trying to imagine a scenario where we've created a terrible scenario and then never attempted to repair the damage we initially caused. That's silly. Instead, imagine that we never meddled in the first place and you'll find your viewpoint is far different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2019, 01:45 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
4,874 posts, read 3,389,817 times
Reputation: 7809
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKM View Post
South Korea would have about half as many people and my Korean friends would not even exist.

Communism likely would have spread further than Vietnam, killing far more people than the war there did.

Saddam or his sons would still be killing, in control of Kuwait and likely would have started a larger war in the ME.

Its hard to say really what other wars would have occurred if we just "stayed out". I am surprised at the number of people ignorant to the stability the US has brought to the world since 1945.

I seriously doubt tiny third world Vietnam would have had the resources or political will to have become an exporter of Communism. It was an independence movement from the start to the end. And China struggling internally with the chaos of the cultural revolution certainly wouldn’t have been in position to export Communism throughout SE Asia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Honolulu
1,365 posts, read 549,081 times
Reputation: 1102
In retrospect, General MacArthur committed the same mistake Napoleon did in Russia.

The UN forces should halt after capturing Pyongyang. North of Pyongyang, it is the mountainous region where tanks and heavy equipment were rendered immobile especially in snowy Winter. If UN forces consolidated their hold after Pyongyang and put those lands under administration of South Korea, current day South Korea would have 1/2 more land and North Korea 1/2 less.

Vietnam War could be avoided if US had intervened in China's Civil War with a minimal commitment. By late 1949, the Communist had conquered almost all of Mainland China while Chiang Kai Shek still retained control of the two big islands -- Taiwan and Hainan. Hainan is even larger than Taiwan and it is strategically close to North Vietnam. Chiang did not have the force to defend both islands so finally he abandoned Hainan in May 1950. If Truman didn't write off Chiang that soon, he could deploy the 7th fleet to defend both Taiwan and Hainan. Though Hainan is much closer than Taiwan to Mainland (about only 19 miles), the Communist didn't have any capabilities to launch amphibious operation as judged by the Battle of Kinmen (a tiny island which is only 4 miles from Mainland) in October 1949. They could only use sampan to deploy soldiers which resulted in a total defeat.

If Hainan island were under control of an US ally, it was much easier to bomb North Vietnam and imposed embargo in the Gulf of Tonkin. And there would not be dispute over the South China Sea since the disputed Spratly Islands are much closer to Hainan than Mainland China.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 02:41 PM
 
12,300 posts, read 18,421,290 times
Reputation: 19200
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgsing View Post
I seriously doubt tiny third world Vietnam would have had the resources or political will to have become an exporter of Communism. It was an independence movement from the start to the end. And China struggling internally with the chaos of the cultural revolution certainly wouldn’t have been in position to export Communism throughout SE Asia.
Well, they did have their own mini sphere of influence in Cambodia and Laos, pretty much making them satellite states between alternatively fighting there own fellow communists in those countries. The Khmer Rouge were particularly nasty of course, first supported by North Vietnam and later toppled by North Vietnam.
All of Indochina was a mess. Before America came there was war, after America left there was wars - Wars with China, Wars with Cambodia, Insurgencies in Laos and the highlands, border conflicts with Thailand, it continued for another decade, only they were killing each other.
You know what really ended it? Soviet Russia collapsed, that and the old guard leaders of Vietnam finally died off. Then and only then did Vietnam reform.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 04:00 PM
 
2,556 posts, read 2,305,031 times
Reputation: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider View Post
WW2 has often remembered as the last war the US won. All others, up to and including Iraq and Afghanistan, have been either failure or ended in some kind of stalemate, all at great human losses. What if we didn't go into Korea, Vietnam, Beirut, Granada and on and on? Would the world look much different? Heck, my shirts are made in Vietnam. Did we have to lose 55,000 Americans plus a million Vietnamese to buy shirts from them?
This was all part of the contain communism strategy. Which worked overall very well up to the total collapse of the Eastern Bloc. Post 1990 the wars became more erratic in an effort to emply the military as world police, often with minimal benefits for the US from the get go.
No wonder the US public has decidedly turned against the interventionists and going forward US engagement will be far more limited. Heck we now produce enough oil domestically, why do we still police the Strait of Hormuz to guarantee oil delivery to the world (Europe and Asia). Who pays us even one dime for the 5th fleet out there? Why do put this burden still on us?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 04:08 PM
 
Location: San José, CA
3,265 posts, read 5,788,317 times
Reputation: 3202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Potential_Landlord View Post
This was all part of the contain communism strategy. Which worked overall very well up to the total collapse of the Eastern Bloc. Post 1990 the wars became more erratic in an effort to emply the military as world police, often with minimal benefits for the US from the get go.
No wonder the US public has decidedly turned against the interventionists and going forward US engagement will be far more limited. Heck we now produce enough oil domestically, why do we still police the Strait of Hormuz to guarantee oil delivery to the world (Europe and Asia). Who pays us even one dime for the 5th fleet out there? Why do put this burden still on us?
We armed militias that we're still fighting today and we spent more than two decades mired in the bloody battle of a country that remains communist to this day while shelling the hell out of its neighbors. If that's working great, I'd hate to find out what not working great would look like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 06:15 PM
 
3,584 posts, read 1,383,703 times
Reputation: 7038
my opinion: the USSR would still be here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 07:16 PM
 
Location: Independent Republic of Ballard
6,635 posts, read 5,060,697 times
Reputation: 4290
I don't think the Korean War could have been avoided, but the other wars could have been. Just think if half that money had been spent on education, health care, housing, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 08:23 PM
 
2,556 posts, read 2,305,031 times
Reputation: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by llowllevellowll View Post
We armed militias that we're still fighting today and we spent more than two decades mired in the bloody battle of a country that remains communist to this day while shelling the hell out of its neighbors. If that's working great, I'd hate to find out what not working great would look like.
Not sure what you're talking about but the US and Vietnam are close allies now. The Communist Eastern Bloc has collapsed completely. Everything has worked out as planned in the end despite serious setbacks and mistakes on the way. Again: if you have BIG goals you will also encounter BIG setbacks. It is how you deal with the setbacks that will decide if you're going to be successful. The BIG goal of first containing and then destroying the communist eastern bloc without provoking nuclear war was one of the biggest endeavors in human history. It worked out beautifully. Better than any endeavors of equal size in history I would say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2019, 10:27 PM
 
Location: Elysium
6,593 posts, read 3,643,660 times
Reputation: 4587
Greece and South Korea would have fallen and since the US had shown an unwillingness to get involved with foreign entanglements the pressure which ended the Soviet Union never comes and Yugoslavia remains intact. Possibly the western NATO nations get picked off one by one since they know that they are alone and to survive as a people they end up like Hungary after one election goes the other way
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:37 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top