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.
The problem is that our enemy had more will and more know-how than we did. And of course, it only makes sense since it's their country...which means they had more to fight for.
The American soldier had nothing at all to fight for unless one expects him to value the freedoms of a foreign nation as much as the citizens of that nation value it for themselves. That's an impossible proposition.
If the Vietnamese cared so much, then every single able bodied Vietnamese citizen regardless of gender should've been in uniform. And I'm sure that wasn't the case.
While I've come to respect your opinion I believe that you are wrong in this aspect. While we might have had plenty of know how, we had no political will or courage to use methods and doctrines of successful warfare.
Again I am not arguing the geopoltical motivations just specifically just focusing on the bare bones facts that it was a very winnable war if there is ever such a thing in the greater scheme.
While I've come to respect your opinion I believe that you are wrong in this aspect. While we might have had plenty of know how, we had no political will or courage to use methods and doctrines of successful warfare.
Again I am not arguing the geopoltical motivations just specifically just focusing on the bare bones facts that it was a very winnable war if there is ever such a thing in the greater scheme.
Geopolitical motivations are more important than the war itself. Soldiers have to know what they're fighting for.
If Obama wants to send me somewhere to fight for what he deems to be America's interest, but I see it as a big 'ol farce, guess what? You ain't gonna get a lot of good soldiering out of me. I'm not risking my life for frivolous reasons.
Again, we had political will, but so did the Vietnamese. Why do you dismiss their will in favor of ours...as if their will doesn't mean as much or can't possibly be stronger than ours. That's s tragic underestimation of a people that have proven themselves to be determined to deal harshly with foreigners on their territory.
American firepower against a determined and proud people is meaningless. That's why we lost 58k, and they lost millions and STILL kept fighting. We could always leave to go home, the Vietnamese never had that choice.
We can want freedom for people more than they want it for themselves. That will always end in disaster.
WWII: Patton was stopped from entering Berlin (by the politicians), so the Russians could get there first. This resulted in a divided Berlin and a divided Germany, and the"cold war" for the next 40 years or so.
Korean "Police Action": MacArthur was stopped from crossing the 38th parallel (by the politicians), resulting in a divided Korea, a war that still isn't "officially" over, and a DMZ that is a natural paradise. The NK leadership is making war sounds again (still) and we don't know WHAT he will do! Other than the fact that he has unilaterally revoked the Armistice!
Viet Nam (yes, I was there, 25th Inf. Div.): Once again, the politicians tried to fight a "limited war", and failed miserably. Yes, I firmly believe that if we had gone there with the intention of getting the job done and getting out, we could have done just that. We certainly had the firepower available to us, WITHOUT even considering nuclear weapons (which some politicians DID consider! Idiots)
Iraq: Another ill-advised attempt at a "police action". If all we wanted to do was get rid of Saddam, we should have just sent an F-111 over with a smart bomb to drop it into his chimney. Problem solved. (my son was there)
Afghanistan: (My son just got back) Another failed effort at "limited war" against an unknown and unknowable enemy. Just as in "my war" in Viet Nam, exactly who is the enemy? The kid on a bicycle with a package in the basket? Is the package lamb for dinner, or is it C4 to kill YOU? There is no way to know until it blows up and the kid and you are both dead.
As for those who denigrate the will and know-how of our people in uniform, if you weren't there, there is no way you can know anything about their dedication to their jobs OR their know-how. If you have never worn the uniform, you know NOTHING!
I spent well over 24 years in uniform, 3 of my kids were in the Navy, one in the Army, and one is currently serving. THINK before you label yourself STUPID!
Those 58,200 people - and those who served alongside the fallen were betrayed by the liberal politicians who sent them to their death by not prosecuting the war with the common sense required to win it.
Ho Chi Minh was right - the tiger can defeat the elephant if the elephant doesn't adapt to reality.
Vietnam was not a conventional war and it was foolish to make our men and women fight like it was.
It is the fight between tiger and elephant. If the tiger stands his ground, the elephant will crush him with its mass. But, if he conserves his mobility, he will finally vanquish the elephant, who bleeds from a multitude of cuts."
We lost the Vietnam War because our liberal political leaders were stupid, and we did not possess the will to win.
President Nixon bowed to political reality and secured an honorable peace.
The sad part is that we left men behind and they may still be working in Russian prison camps to this day.
Yeah, Nixon's "peace with honor" (AKA: how to get an additional 21,000 U.S. troops killed through Vietnamization). Please tell me where's the will in that.
The same deal that was agreed upon in 1973 could have been had in 1969. Nixon sucked.
Redraven, you are absolutely right about doing the job in Viet Nam and getting out. I heard many higher ranking Army officers state the same thing during that time. And by the way, the Army was in sad shape towards the end and several years after that 'war' ended.
Maybe if some of the chicken hawk draft dodgers - Cheney, Limbaugh, Nugent - or those whose parents' were able to use their influence to keep their own kids from seeing combat (Bush) - or those cowards who chose cushy deals in France trying to convert the citizens to their religion instead of fighting in a war they supported for others (Romney) - had actually had the courage to serve, maybe the outcome would have been different.
Go ahead. Name Democrats who supported the Viet Nam War and subsequent wars while themselves taking every deferment and loophole they could find. Name me one Democrat who actively protested FOR the draft during the Viet Nam War but who hightailed his sorry cowardly ass out of the country to avoid serving himself.
Every person on my list has proven themselves to be pro war - as long as other people are doing the fighting.
Go ahead and make your own list of Democrats who are or were pro war but who crapped their pants to avoid the draft or who claimed a boil on his ass should keep him out of the military or who claimed student deferment after student deferment but who, years later, was tantamount in sending thousands of our young men and women off to fight a war based on (cough, cough) "faulty intelligence," not to mention the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women, and children who also died.
I'll wait.
Last edited by Cinebar; 03-17-2013 at 05:53 PM..
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.
