|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?
Highly unlikely that US could have won in Vietnam. Too much asymmetry in motivation.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?
Someone probably already said this, but never going in in the first place would have been a huge victory.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?
Washington could have used nukes.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9klk7iSCII McCain: "Congressmen, we never lost a battle in Vietnam. It was American public opinion that forced us to lose that conflict." [/ QUOTE ] The Vietnam War was never about "winning battles". The notion of a battlefield covering a specific area and of a battle lasting speficic hours or days was obsolete long before the first American advisor set foot in Vietnam. The exception which was Dien Bien Phu came about because of French stupidity - which the Americans later duplicated with gusto. Late in that war, the U.S. Marines finally formulated the correct approach for it, by using small units in long-term, deep-range engagements -- and they started to seriously, finally, putting a dent on Charlie. It's indicative that the North Vietnamese demanded when the peace talks started for the Marine operations to cease. Charlie was right in wanting his country free from foreigners. (Charlie was not fighting for the dictatorship of the proletariat!) And Charlie was right in his battle methods. I'm glad Charlie won the war. There is now very little to stop a total rapprochement between Ho Chi Minh and Washington. Except for the pair of nincompoops at the White House. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9klk7iSCII McCain: "Congressmen, we never lost a battle in Vietnam. It was American public opinion that forced us to lose that conflict." [/ QUOTE ] The Vietnam War was never about "winning battles". The notion of a battlefield covering a specific area and of a battle lasting speficic hours or days was obsolete long before the first American advisor set foot in Vietnam. The exception which was Dien Bien Phu came about because of French stupidity - which the Americans later duplicated with gusto. Late in that war, the U.S. Marines finally formulated the correct approach for it, by using small units in long-term, deep-range engagements -- and they started to seriously, finally, putting a dent on Charlie. It's indicative that the North Vietnamese demanded when the peace talks started for the Marine operations to cease. Charlie was right in wanting his country free from foreigners. (Charlie was not fighting for the dictatorship of the proletariat!) And Charlie was right in his battle methods. I'm glad Charlie won the war. There is now very little to stop a total rapprochement between Ho Chi Minh and Washington. Except for the pair of nincompoops at the White House. [/ QUOTE ] No war is about winning the battles, but no war is won without winning battles. And no political victory between warring factions can be won without military victory first. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9klk7iSCII McCain: "Congressmen, we never lost a battle in Vietnam. It was American public opinion that forced us to lose that conflict." [/ QUOTE ] The Vietnam War was never about "winning battles". The notion of a battlefield covering a specific area and of a battle lasting speficic hours or days was obsolete long before the first American advisor set foot in Vietnam. The exception which was Dien Bien Phu came about because of French stupidity - which the Americans later duplicated with gusto. Late in that war, the U.S. Marines finally formulated the correct approach for it, by using small units in long-term, deep-range engagements -- and they started to seriously, finally, putting a dent on Charlie. It's indicative that the North Vietnamese demanded when the peace talks started for the Marine operations to cease. Charlie was right in wanting his country free from foreigners. (Charlie was not fighting for the dictatorship of the proletariat!) And Charlie was right in his battle methods. I'm glad Charlie won the war. There is now very little to stop a total rapprochement between Ho Chi Minh and Washington. Except for the pair of nincompoops at the White House. [/ QUOTE ] No war is about winning the battles, but no war is won without winning battles. And no political victory between warring factions can be won without military victory first. [/ QUOTE ] How can you say this in the very thread about the political victory of the Communists in that they evicted the foreigners and reunited the country under communist rule, all without winning the battles or a final military victory. |
|
|