@Pervavita:
i ment it as in there was no major pushes with victory of capture a city and you win type war. no side could afford to fight like that as the fear of nukes was there that could win the war for ether side in one simple move. it was war, it was on large war, it had many diffrent theaters that crossed over 4 of the 6 populated continouts, and the last two being N Amarica and Ociana. US was invalved so we now had 5 out of 6 invalved. thats more or the same as WWI.
Let me get this straight.
You think that because the US sent the military all over the globe during a 50 year period, that constitutes a World War.
That’s absurd, but then again…that’s exactly what some foreigners thing of us: aggressors that stick our nose in everybody’s business. The US was trying to combat the “Red Menace,” but the truth is, we couldn’t stop that, and it had little to do with USSR anyway. We were convinced otherwise, though.
@dezrtfish:
@Jermofoot:
I hope I didn’t misunderstand you…but I think you’d be doing your kids the right thing. Father first, fighter second.
It’s a tough position to be in, I hope my children can serve the country in a less sacrificial way than I have and will, but whatever their choice I will be proud…
Just tell them to go to school, get a job, work like their life depends on it, take care of their parents, and don’t act like a dumbass. That should be good.
@balungaloaf:
well, i mean n.korea used soviet tanks and arms. and it is a fact that kim il sung or whoever asked stalin if it was ok to invade. stalin would not let him. stalin was in charge here. after a while stalin blessed the invasion. it was the USSR giving the orders. America knew this and tried to stop it to show that the US would counter any russian agression. and the soviets began this agression by occupying the eastern european countries.
Yes, the N. Koreans had Soviet-made, hand-me-down weaponry & equipment, but so did the S. Koreans (from the US). That’s how the area was administrated post-WW2. Same for Europe.
And Stalin was not calling the shots. Kim wanted to unite the peninsula, Stalin agreed, but didn’t want to risk getting into another war, possibly with the US. America didn’t know shit about this - it came as a surprise to the US, the UN, and only S. Korean troops were in S. Korea at the time.
the Russians concede that it was them all along flying the migs. thats war also. and we knew it was them all along.
Of course it was them, they warned us about crossing the DMZ (and China as well)! He can you be so obtuse? Had we stopped at the agreed border, it wouldn’t have been as large of a conflict.
and vietnam got all of its armaments of every sort from the USSR for the war. all those great SAM missiles that shot down our B-52’s were made specifically by the USSR for use by the NVA. the russians knew what they were doing. and so did we.
First of all, we were involved in Vietnam before the Soviets, so that’s bull-honkey. That’s one thing you could actually be mad at France for. But the N. Vietnamese had the same ambitions as the N. Koreans, and neither China nor the USSR were considered for the future. That’s where we were wrong. We say all Communist nations as one giant entity when it wasn’t.
oh and the comintern. lenin devised the comintern, and one thing for sure is, is that the USSR ran the comintern as the boss, not as an equal. and every communist nation joined the comintern, and therefor was wielded by the USSR. china didnt like it very well and was the only nation strong enough to rebuff the soviets for bossing them around all the time. b/c china would be able to make russia pay for invading it. not so with the other nations.
WTF? The Comintern was gone before the end of WW2, before China was even Communist.
#1, numero uno, the big fact of the war……,
the united states went to vietnam to keep if from being taken over by the communist north.
Wrong. The US went in trying to prevent the spread of communist influences, or in this case, USSR influences. Either way, we were already there.
2. the us fought and fought and kept the NVA or vietcong from taking over. it took many years but thats because the north lives right there, they can wait to outlast us. but we knew this and trained the s. vietnamese soldiers to defend their own country.
I can agree with this.
3. we began to withdraw and let the newly trained s.vietnamese army take care of its own country. THE COUNTRY WAS STILL FREE, our GOAL ALL ALONG. we were able to repulse the initial invasions back and keep an insurgency from taking over when it was in full steam.
Except it was shown that the S. Vietnamese were pretty much incapable of protecting themselves without us.
4. our troops are out, our goal is complete. a victory for what we wanted to accomplish. the north sensed a southern abandonment by the US and unleashed a 2 million man invasion, backed by armored divisions. thats huge, thats way bigger than hitlers invasion of the USSR. but with american naval guns and air support, the s.vietnamese repulsed this invasion. a HUGE victory.
Ok, I don’t know what you are talking about here. Please clarify. I think you have the timetable messed up.
5. ted kennedy that lowlife senator begins his grand campaign to ensure defeat. well, we shouldnt help them at all he says. idiots believe his orchestrated defeat clause, man did he ever want us to lose, like democrats today. he got his democrat majority to cut off funding for the s.vietnamese…. :cry: truly a dark day.
More BS. You don’t even mention how critical the citizens were of the war, or the Paris Peace Accords. The entire country was tired of it. It was a lost cause. Get over it.
6. well now the s.vietnamese felt entirely ABANDONED. morale sinks. little hope to always be able to again and again repulse a SOVIET funded and armed n.vietnamese army. without weapons and parts from the US, the s.vietnamese had no chance. and they knew it……and so did God-damned ted kennedy.
Well, a truce had been negotiated, and damned if anybody wanted us to go back in. It would have killed politically anyone who decided that, and anyone with a brain new there was no point to it. Your forget that CHINA also supplied the N. Vietnamese, but the key here is that Vietnam wanted to united - China nor the USSR had any interest or advantage in annexing the area.
7. then after a second huge invasion, the north got what ted kennedy wanted. their victory. then the liberal unchallenged media twisted the whole thing into a failure. it took em 10 years of distortions, but unchallenged, they made their mark.
Oh geez. Ted Kennedy wants you to grow a brain so you can provide a real argument. There must be a hell of a lot of Vietnamese/Commie lovers in the states to reelect a guy continuously that wanted us to lose and the N. Vietnamese to win. People just wanted out of Vietnam, PERIOD.
so after all, the vietnam war was a winable war. hell we did win. we held off the communists until the south could defend itself. thats what we were there to do. we werent there to stay in s.vietnam forever. so we left with our goal completed. success. a win. but the only reason we lost was due to democrats abandoning our victory following the liberal high priest kennedy. thats right, no way a democrat could ever be in favor of a plan that see’s america lose……no way right? hmmm, sounds familiar, like now perhaps. where a democrat is quoted as “success in iraq is bad for our party”. reid saying we already lost in jan 2007, on and on and on.
Vietnam was no more winnable than the Korean War. Just like Iraq today won’t rid the world of terrorism. Pointless ventures that accomplished nothing.
After it was over, all that happened was Vietnam reunited. Not the end of the world, communism didn’t win. We completely misjudged the situation and got burned for it, and you can’t even see it. What a “success” to hold off the N. Vietnamese for years, then S. Vietnam collapses as soon as we leave. Yup, that was really worth our trouble.
Please, drop the Dem kick, it makes you look like the Loose Change guy, just a different angle.
so brush up on your vietnam war history bub, b/c the way you spin it sounds like it came right from old teddy himself.
That’s hilarious. I’m not the one accusing Democrats of wanting to lose. Get a different schtick, this one’s tiring. I also don’t have to qualify my statements with…“we won, until we left.” Yeah, whatever dude. I see the history written, and very little matches up with what you say.