20-07-2005 02:07									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: I wish I shared your optimism.

I don't find that all too optimistic

	20-07-2005 02:57									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Last Conformist quote: how was the military's credibility hurt: the us won against a strong NVA As far as credibility goes, what counts is perceptions, not kill ratios. Most people came away with the perception the US lost.

Because the US military was weak? Are you seriously suggesting that most people believe that if only the US military had been stronger south vietnam would never have become communist?

What is it about the vietnam war that would possibly have diminished the credibility of the US military?

US foreign policy was the real credibility loser in vietnam not the us military.

	20-07-2005 03:22									#63
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo Because the US military was weak? Are you seriously suggesting that most people believe that if only the US military had been stronger south vietnam would never have become communist?

I said most people think the US lost the war.

quote: What is it about the vietnam war that would possibly have diminished the credibility of the US military?

The perception that the us was defeated. Duh!

I shan't begin to guess how many times I've heard the Vietnam war mentioned as proof that "the People" can stand up to the evil Yanks and win.

	20-07-2005 03:26									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by MikeH I can't believe my confederacy troll got no response.

Thats actually a serious comparison. Historian C Vann Woodward wrote an essay about how the south had a more tragic history, including adjusting to losing a war, and how Viet Nam was making the North more like the South in that respect.

I think it was in "The burden of Southern History"

	20-07-2005 03:49									#65
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Saras And achieved almost none of the objectives.

Two out of three aren't bad. We didn't succeed in the conquest of Canada, but we got everything else.

	20-07-2005 03:56									#66
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Vietnam isn't the first war the U.S. lost, and we didn't lose the Civil War. The US government won that one. The first war the U.S. lost was against the Souix nation in 1867, although they subsequently lost the peace.

	20-07-2005 04:10									#67
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by sprucemoose3311 lets break this down: 11 years... thats 2 years too many... unless you count covert operations during french/indochina war... then thats not enough years. the first us troops killed was in 1956.....

That sure was an impressive display of military specification quoting. That more than makes up for the fact that the most powerful military in the world went into a completely insignificant (except for whatever symbolic value you choose to assign) ex-colony and decimated it to the point where it was marginally more completely insignificant at a high cost and ultimate outcome of simply delaying the very thing they were trying to prevent.

	20-07-2005 04:28									#68
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos 58K killed and 130K wounded over the 11 years given is actually not bad at all when you considered how many servicemen fought/scale of the operation. But if us acheiving our pimary objective (as often as it was changed) and suffering those casualties costitutes a defeat, how does suffering 2-3 million casualties and your country being a smoldering ruin but having gotten South Vietnam consitute a victoy? Unless victory simply means controling the territiry, in which case alot of people here a hipocrits concerning some other conflicts.

Victory generally means achieving your objectives. Unless you're so desperate to deny defeat that you'd actually trot out an objective of pulling your troops out to be the measure of success.

	20-07-2005 04:36									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

The strategic aim of the Vietnam War was to stop the spread of Communism. Although the U.S. failed to stop the spread into the whole of Indochina, it was contained there, and didn't spread to the rest of SouthEast Asia. In strategic terms, it was a victory.

	20-07-2005 04:53									#70
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara The strategic aim of the Vietnam War was to stop the spread of Communism. Although the U.S. failed to stop the spread into the whole of Indochina, it was contained there, and didn't spread to the rest of SouthEast Asia. In strategic terms, it was a victory.

Only if we assume that communism would have spread further than vietnam if the US had done nothing. I'm not convinced that it would have done so.

	20-07-2005 05:03									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Ted Striker Ted Striker, Battlefield 2 Commander "ARTILLERY YOUR AREA!!!!!!!!"

Yer still a Private, ain't ya?

Keep an eye out for PO3Lonestar. Ironically, as the only sailor that would be with the USMC IRL is the medic, I'm often...the medic.

Lonestar!


"For God's sake I need a pickup!"

	20-07-2005 05:08									#72
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo Only if we assume that communism would have spread further than vietnam if the US had done nothing. I'm not convinced that it would have done so.

Exactly. And what's more, I'm not seeing any evidence that it would have. Vietnam was already active outside its borders after being fully taken over by the communists. Laos and Cambodia succummed. Burma was (and still is) an autocratic shithole that at the time was under the control of a self-avowed (although admittedly in-name-only) socialist. Where's the evidence of any form of containment - that the various communist factions, who didn't seem to like each other much anyway, had somehow "learned their lesson" from the Vietnam war?

	20-07-2005 05:28									#73
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It's not that they learned their lesson. There were armed movements against the government in Burma and Thailand. The problem is that the U.S. was quite correct about the Domino Theory, successful revolutions spawn new ones. The American War, as the Vietnamese call it, sapped their revolutionary energy and deflected the international revolutionary impulse that typically follows successful revolutions.

	20-07-2005 07:23									#74
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Lonestar Yer still a Private, ain't ya? Keep an eye out for PO3Lonestar. Ironically, as the only sailor that would be with the USMC IRL is the medic, I'm often...the medic. Lonestar! "For God's sake I need a pickup!"

I'm a Lance Corporal now

I'll look for you

	20-07-2005 07:36									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Ted Striker I'm a Lance Corporal now I'll look for you

I assume yer handle is "Ted_Striker!"

	20-07-2005 11:24									#76
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Two out of three aren't bad. We didn't succeed in the conquest of Canada, but we got everything else.

Those two being? End of impressing seamen doesn't count.

	20-07-2005 12:38									#77
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Geronimo US foreign policy was the real credibility loser in vietnam not the us military.

absolutly correct on that point.
US had horrible foreign policy. most foreign representatives did not speak the local language, did not know they were pissing off the local people.
furthermore, a lot of us aid to vietnamese villages in the north and south was credited to the USSR because the communists spread word that the aid was from the USSR and they wrote in vietnamese: from the USSR

The US did learn from most of its mistakes... but there was a lot of ground to recover and it would have been difficult to secure indochina after these political mistakes.

a good fictionalized read of this, and one of the better Vietnam war books, is The Ugly American

itsa balanced but eventually pro american look at actions that had occured and should spread on a larger scale

	20-07-2005 13:01									#78
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by sprucemoose3311 the goal set forth by lyndon johnson was to fight a war of attrition to force the north to the bargaining table and force a peace settlement. we were afraid to have the chinese enter the war like korea. the north did not want to recognize the south as legitimate and the south felt the same. it took years before all three sides even agreed upon how to start peace talks. Nixon came in and created a policy of vietnamization. us troops would be replaced by vietnamese troops. this worked well, by the time of the peace treaty, the vietnamese made up large percentages of active combat units. when aided by air cover they were just as effective as US troops. then peace came. preemptive: no one has brought it up yet but i will preemt it: The tet offensive was a US victory. initially the NVA succeded in certain areas. HOWEVER at the end of the battle the North had lost so much man power and resources that they could not launch an offensive until 1975.

Actually the NVA launched a huge offensive in 1972 that almost did to the NVA what Tet did to the VC. This was supposed to be "the final offensive", and the losses were never fully recovered by the North. The actual final offensive in 1975 was only supposed to be a limited offensive, but between the incompetence of the South Vietnamese leadership and the determination of the radicals in the U.S. Congress to see South Vietnam defeated the NVA was able to press on and destroy most of the South's better formations. Wisely the NVA kept up a relentless pursuit and walked into Saigon with relatively weak forces against almost no resistence from the thouroughly demoralized and disintegrating ARVN.

	20-07-2005 14:51									#79
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Decision goes to the defender.

Given that the U.S. started the war by trying to invade Canada, and had their butts kicked, Canada won the war.

	20-07-2005 14:52									#80
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe Actually the causus belli was impressment of US merchant seamen into service for the Brits.

A feeble excuse to start a war, not unlike weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

	20-07-2005 14:58									#81
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by sprucemoose3311 how did the us lose vietnam if us involvement ended in 1973, pulled out all us military personel and left by april. then wietnam fell due to high corruption in may of 1975...

Because the US was forced to completely retreat with its tail between its legs. The puppet government it left behind collapsed like a house of cards. US policies, particularly bombing neutral countries, turned people in the region against US puppets in places like Laos and Cambodia. And the US spent the next 15 years looking weak on the international stage.

	20-07-2005 16:45									#82
	Increase Your PM Length

Yeah, we sure looked weak in the 80's

	20-07-2005 16:51									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai A feeble excuse to start a war, not unlike weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Yea, involuntary servitude is a really stupid reason to go to war. I'm sure Canada will agree when I make you my new butler.

	20-07-2005 17:04									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Because the US was forced to completely retreat with its tail between its legs. The puppet government it left behind collapsed like a house of cards. US policies, particularly bombing neutral countries, turned people in the region against US puppets in places like Laos and Cambodia. And the US spent the next 15 years looking weak on the international stage.

The U.S. military left completely intact and in comfort long before the collapse of ARVN.

The last significant U.S. military action in Vietnam was two years before the collapse.

As for bombing of neutral countries, these same countries had been occupied by the NVA for years before the U.S. started to bomb their positions.

Let's see, Saigon was lost in 1975. The U.S. led West won the Cold War (you know, the 50 year war which Vietnam was only a part of) in 1989. That's 14 years, and we weren't exactly looking weak just before we won were we?

Typical crap from you. You have to run the U.S. down in order to live with your devotion to your Chicom masters. But you might consider burnishing your rationalizations in private in order to avoid the regular pwnage you receive.

	20-07-2005 17:13									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: As for bombing of neutral countries, these same countries had been occupied by the NVA for years before the U.S. started to bomb their positions.

Not to mention that according to international law you have to be capable of maintaining your neutrality to be a legal neutral.

	20-07-2005 17:27									#86
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Saras Those two being? End of impressing seamen doesn't count.

1st and foremost, to stop British molestation of American shipping, including the impressment of American sailors. Despite your dissmissal, for a nation that lives off of trade, this was an extremely serious threat. You can poo-poo if you like, but if sailors can't be secure from foriegn piracy, then there aren't going to be many more sailors soon, which means no trade, which means the U.S.'s economy collapses.

2) To remove British forts from the American fronteer and stop the Brits from stirring up the Indians against us. Regardless of whether or noth the Indians had a legit cause for going after us, the Brits had no right to be arming them and giving them supplies just to attack us. Further, if you can't control your own territory and stop foreign countries from putting forts in it, it's not your territory. Had we done nothing about those forts, the Brits could have claimed the Northwest territories.

The seizure of Canada was tacked on as a, would be nice if we can get it, but it was not the major or even secondary war aim of the U.S. The goals of the war was to force Britain to stop ****ing with us. We won the war.

Canada didn't exist. Therefore, it cannot, by definition, have won the war. The British Empire managed to avoid losing a colony, hardly a victory for the most powerful country in the world. They should have wiped the floor with us, even considering Nappy's threat in Europe.

	20-07-2005 17:34									#87
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Sikander The actual final offensive in 1975 was only supposed to be a limited offensive, but between the incompetence of the South Vietnamese leadership and the determination of the radicals in the U.S. Congress to see South Vietnam defeated the NVA was able to press on and destroy most of the South's better formations.

Actually, the South started an offensive after the U.S. pulled out, despite the fact there was supposed to be a cease fire. They did well enough for a while, but they overstretched themselves (considering the corruption and lack of American air support).

In '75, the South decided to pull back to better defend itself in the face of a minor NVA offesnive, but due to total incompetence on its part, the orderly retreat fell apart into a total collapse on the part of ARVN, and the NVA just moved forward and picked up the pieces.

It wasn't "radicals in the U.S. Congress" who caused the South to fall. They, along with pretty much everyone but the reactionaries, felt that the South was a lost cause, even with all the help that we could have given them. Even the Ford Administration considered it hopeless, though they were willing to send supplies anyway.

	20-07-2005 17:35									#88
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos Not to mention that according to international law you have to be capable of maintaining your neutrality to be a legal neutral.

So then Nicaragua had every right to invade the Honduras in the 1980s.

	20-07-2005 17:42									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Patroklos Yeah, we sure looked weak in the 80's

Other than the great American victories over the great military powers of Panama and Grenada, what did the US military do between 73 and 88?

	20-07-2005 17:47									#90
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Other than the great American victories over the great military powers of Panama and Grenada, what did the US military do between 73 and 88?

Continue to win the Cold War, as it would seem.

Or maybe we should have started some other wars so we could win them?