Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 12-01-2007, 06:43 AM
Copernicus Copernicus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,912
Default Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or just being an ass? How is your post responsive to the contemporary meaning of "terrorism".

Oh, it doesnt. STFU.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I get your drift but I don't agree with. You mean the US is always right and everyone else that disagree with her, whatever she does, are the bad guys.

Get real!

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't "get anything", or bother to try and "get anything". If you did you would realize your response doesnt have a gd thing to do with what I wrote. I repeat, STFU.

Why you arent perma-banned is a mystery to me, unless 2+2 thinks you attract hits because of your entertainment value.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 12-01-2007, 06:54 AM
MidGe MidGe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Shame on you, Blackwater!
Posts: 3,908
Default Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or just being an ass? How is your post responsive to the contemporary meaning of "terrorism".

Oh, it doesnt. STFU.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I get your drift but I don't agree with. You mean the US is always right and everyone else that disagree with her, whatever she does, are the bad guys.

Get real!

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't "get anything", or bother to try and "get anything". If you did you would realize your response doesnt have a gd thing to do with what I wrote. I repeat, STFU.

Why you arent perma-banned is a mystery to me, unless 2+2 thinks you attract hits because of your entertainment value.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that answer from someone who says: 'How is your post responsive to the contemporary meaning of "terrorism"'.

You are topping the trolling posts here, with that ststement! LOL
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 12-01-2007, 07:33 AM
Copernicus Copernicus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 6,912
Default Re: Could We Have Won Vietnam?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or just being an ass? How is your post responsive to the contemporary meaning of "terrorism".

Oh, it doesnt. STFU.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I get your drift but I don't agree with. You mean the US is always right and everyone else that disagree with her, whatever she does, are the bad guys.

Get real!

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't "get anything", or bother to try and "get anything". If you did you would realize your response doesnt have a gd thing to do with what I wrote. I repeat, STFU.

Why you arent perma-banned is a mystery to me, unless 2+2 thinks you attract hits because of your entertainment value.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that answer from someone who says: 'How is your post responsive to the contemporary meaning of "terrorism"'.

You are topping the trolling posts here, with that ststement! LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

and you dont know what trolling is. Still batting 1000.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 12-01-2007, 11:13 AM
Kaj Kaj is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bet-the-pot
Posts: 1,812
Default 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.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.