Total Posts:118|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

We Won the Vietnam War

1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:33:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It was a glorious victory for the US and we should celebrate it. It was another victory against the communists. We only lost 55,000 men. Far less than World War 2. The war ended when the Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973 giving us back our POWs and recognizing South Vietnam as an indepent nation. Just like we wanted. It was truly peace with honor as President Richard Nixon put it.

In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began, but the US was not part of it to the exception of sending military advisors. Eventually the North won, but we did not lose because were not part of this war. Being the nice country that we are, we helped some South Vietnamese leave.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:44:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Dude, we lost it, ok?

IT was just one of those wars that we fought horribly thanks to sucky generals, that didn't have a clue how to fight that sort of war. It was a winnable war, but we realized to late that we were trying to win people over, not kill the enemy so much.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Also, we broke the military alliance by not joining the 1975 war. We still had an economic alliance.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:54:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

They got lucky? I hate to say it but I think we may have lost had Germany not turned on the Soviets. Imagine all those resources wasted on the eastern front sent towards Great Britain.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:56:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:54:18 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

They got lucky? I hate to say it but I think we may have lost had Germany not turned on the Soviets. Imagine all those resources wasted on the eastern front sent towards Great Britain.

I meant World War 1. My mistake.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 10:57:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:54:18 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

They got lucky? I hate to say it but I think we may have lost had Germany not turned on the Soviets. Imagine all those resources wasted on the eastern front sent towards Great Britain.

Well, I'm not saying it wasn't extremely beneficial to us aswell, I'm just pointing out they were lucky to be accepted. I mean, honestly, without us, they would have been fvcked.

IT still somewhat boggles my mind that Germany could do so much with how small it is. It took on, quite literally, the world, and if it hadn't had an idiot for a leader, they probably would have succeeded. And, Hitler was an idiot for trying to control how the battles were fought, and not letting his generals do what they wanted in the battle scale. He was quite a brilliant politician.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:00:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also, remember the Second Vietnam War was part of the Cold War. We one won the Cold War, so what if we lost an ally. I meant WW1 not WW2. My mistake.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:04:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:57:41 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:54:18 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

They got lucky? I hate to say it but I think we may have lost had Germany not turned on the Soviets. Imagine all those resources wasted on the eastern front sent towards Great Britain.

Well, I'm not saying it wasn't extremely beneficial to us aswell, I'm just pointing out they were lucky to be accepted. I mean, honestly, without us, they would have been fvcked.

IT still somewhat boggles my mind that Germany could do so much with how small it is. It took on, quite literally, the world, and if it hadn't had an idiot for a leader, they probably would have succeeded. And, Hitler was an idiot for trying to control how the battles were fought, and not letting his generals do what they wanted in the battle scale. He was quite a brilliant politician.

It really was unbelievable, we are brought up to think the allies were superior in every way, but the Germans had us straight beat on just about everything. Hell if Einstein and the rest of their scientists hadn't have fled we could very easily have lost to an ICBM toting nuclear Germany.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:05:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 11:00:54 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Also, remember the Second Vietnam War was part of the Cold War. We one won the Cold War, so what if we lost an ally. I meant WW1 not WW2. My mistake.

Lost the battle but won the war? That'd work if it was called the Vietnam battle of the Cold war. Unfortunately it was war in itself.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:06:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 11:04:55 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:57:41 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:54:18 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

They got lucky? I hate to say it but I think we may have lost had Germany not turned on the Soviets. Imagine all those resources wasted on the eastern front sent towards Great Britain.

Well, I'm not saying it wasn't extremely beneficial to us aswell, I'm just pointing out they were lucky to be accepted. I mean, honestly, without us, they would have been fvcked.

IT still somewhat boggles my mind that Germany could do so much with how small it is. It took on, quite literally, the world, and if it hadn't had an idiot for a leader, they probably would have succeeded. And, Hitler was an idiot for trying to control how the battles were fought, and not letting his generals do what they wanted in the battle scale. He was quite a brilliant politician.

It really was unbelievable, we are brought up to think the allies were superior in every way, but the Germans had us straight beat on just about everything. Hell if Einstein and the rest of their scientists hadn't have fled we could very easily have lost to an ICBM toting nuclear Germany.

Strange how, when you learn more about WWII, it just sorta seems like things just "clicked" for the Allies at the end. Everything just started working for the Allies, while Germany stopped working.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:07:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 11:05:56 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 11:00:54 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Also, remember the Second Vietnam War was part of the Cold War. We one won the Cold War, so what if we lost an ally. I meant WW1 not WW2. My mistake.

Lost the battle but won the war? That'd work if it was called the Vietnam battle of the Cold war. Unfortunately it was war in itself.

Cold War was more like WWIII TBH, since it has a couple wars within itself.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:11:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
omfg sigged
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:18:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There were not 2 separate Vietnam wars. The Vietnam war lasted from about 1955 to 1975. There was no gap in the fighting between 1973 and 1975. The North fought the South continuously. The US pulled out it's troops in 1973 while fighting was still going on. There was no illusion of a ceasefire. Just because we left before we were able to be defeated doesn't mean that everything that happened afterwards was somehow unrelated to us, and it certainly doesn't mean that we won.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:18:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
like, you can make the case that the war was a draw since the US got out before it was over but not really. But seriously not just a victory, but a glorious victory? Roflcopter.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2012 11:22:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I sigged my favorite part. I like imagining it read in a dramatic way, like the intro to some alternate history war movie.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 12:34:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Alright HG, I'll bite, especially since I didn't find your previous explanation satisfactory.

Explain to me how us going into Vietnam, getting our a**es whipped by an arguably underarmed and undertrained force so badly that we end up literally running with our tail between our legs and watch as North Vietnam sacks Seoul, the one place we DIDN'T want them to sack. Explain to me how in any way, shape, or form that constitutes even a TIE, much less a GLORIOUS VICTORY.

Lol.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 2:01:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
For a supposed Historygenius, you have a very skewed perception of the Vietnam War.

Firstly, the war was a strategic loss for the US. It's not just that the US failed to eradicate communism in North Vietnam, it failed to protect South Vietnam after the troop withdrawal. Policy of containment failed in Vietnam.

Secondly, despite far superior numerical forces and quality of weapons, training etc. the 2 sides suffered somewhat equal casualties. In essence, just like the French experienced in Indochina, the rebels completely outmatched the US and it's allies through ambushes and the like. It's not like many war movies where you might consider the war a 'tie' or the Americans winning. They didn't win, plain and simple.

Vietnam was an interesting war in that it showed (as with Algiers and Indochina) how battles are not necessarily won through brute military force. The US did have many tactical victories in Vietnam (as well as many tactical defeats) , but completely lost on the strategic front.

I seriously suggest you broaden your understanding of history and examine a multiplicity of conflicts, as well as redefining 'victory' . Pearl Harbour might have been a great tactical victory for the Japanese, but it was a strategic defeat (it could have been a strategic victory if they had launched a 3rd wave and certain factors like the carriers were in their favour) . Vietnam was not a tactical victory, and a terrible strategic defeat.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 2:21:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 11:18:57 PM, thett3 wrote:
like, you can make the case that the war was a draw since the US got out before it was over but not really. But seriously not just a victory, but a glorious victory? Roflcopter.

Dude, he mentioned that only 55,000 US soldiers died...sounds pretty good to me, you know, compared to like the first half of the 20th century.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 5:38:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 2:01:19 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
Secondly, despite far superior numerical forces and quality of weapons, training etc. the 2 sides suffered somewhat equal casualties.
I don't think so, Ma'am. Try getting your figures right the next time. 40-60k losses on one side compared to a million-plus on the other. Seems pretty equal.
blameworthy
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 7:02:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

You have a very strange view of history. The U.S.S.R. was integral to demolishing the German Empire in Eastern Europe. How do you think that the Soviet Union was able to secure control over the region for the next 50 years? The Russians never lost WWII; they were the prime reason that the Allies won.
blameworthy
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 7:05:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:57:41 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:54:18 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

They got lucky? I hate to say it but I think we may have lost had Germany not turned on the Soviets. Imagine all those resources wasted on the eastern front sent towards Great Britain.

Well, I'm not saying it wasn't extremely beneficial to us aswell, I'm just pointing out they were lucky to be accepted. I mean, honestly, without us, they would have been fvcked.

I would like to see a source for this. The USSR turned back a German invasion on their own and completely demolished the Eastern front of the Third Reich. We needed their aid. Why would we ally ourselves with a Communist nation? We even strove to overthrow their regime after the Revolution.
IT still somewhat boggles my mind that Germany could do so much with how small it is. It took on, quite literally, the world, and if it hadn't had an idiot for a leader, they probably would have succeeded. And, Hitler was an idiot for trying to control how the battles were fought, and not letting his generals do what they wanted in the battle scale. He was quite a brilliant politician.
He was only a brilliant politician if being an excellent politician entails committing genocide as a means of obtaining power.
blameworthy
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 7:06:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 12:34:12 AM, Zaradi wrote:
Alright HG, I'll bite, especially since I didn't find your previous explanation satisfactory.

Explain to me how us going into Vietnam, getting our a**es whipped by an arguably underarmed and undertrained force so badly that we end up literally running with our tail between our legs and watch as North Vietnam sacks Seoul, the one place we DIDN'T want them to sack. Explain to me how in any way, shape, or form that constitutes even a TIE, much less a GLORIOUS VICTORY.

Lol.

He is the master historical revisionist of this website.
blameworthy
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 7:07:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 5:38:22 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 11/1/2012 2:01:19 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
Secondly, despite far superior numerical forces and quality of weapons, training etc. the 2 sides suffered somewhat equal casualties.
I don't think so, Ma'am. Try getting your figures right the next time. 40-60k losses on one side compared to a million-plus on the other. Seems pretty equal.

It is not difficult to rack up casualties when you are bombing and dumping Napalm on civilians.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 8:26:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 7:07:55 AM, blameworthy wrote:
It is not difficult to rack up casualties when you are bombing and dumping Napalm on civilians.
Strawman.
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 8:59:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?


1: Russia won World War 2, as much as a war can be won. They took back all the land they lost AND captured a lot of land in addition to that.

2: If Russia had been defeated by Germany, as long as the other allies were able to defeat Germany afterwards, we would have won.

The reason why your argument doesn't work in this situation is that the United States specifically declared that it's goal was to protect South Vietnam from the North. That means that when we retreated from Vietnam and the South was taken over as a consequence, we failed to secure our goal and thus lost the war.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 1:11:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/31/2012 10:33:44 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
It was a glorious victory for the US and we should celebrate it. It was another victory against the communists. We only lost 55,000 men. Far less than World War 2. The war ended when the Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973 giving us back our POWs and recognizing South Vietnam as an indepent nation. Just like we wanted. It was truly peace with honor as President Richard Nixon put it.

In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began, but the US was not part of it to the exception of sending military advisors. Eventually the North won, but we did not lose because were not part of this war. Being the nice country that we are, we helped some South Vietnamese leave.

Surely, you can't be serious, 1HistoryGenius.....
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2012 4:17:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/1/2012 7:02:27 AM, blameworthy wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:51:01 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:48:42 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:47:56 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 10/31/2012 10:41:00 PM, lewis20 wrote:
North Vietnam took over South Vietnam, our ally, yet we still won? Kind of defies logic doesn't it?

Russia was part of the allies and it lost World War 2, but did we lose it also?

Russia lost WWII? That's news to me.

They got lucky and didn't directly engage most American troops before they asked to be an Ally. If it had been Japan for instance, I imagine we would have been rather "HELL NO!"ish.

You have a very strange view of history. The U.S.S.R. was integral to demolishing the German Empire in Eastern Europe. How do you think that the Soviet Union was able to secure control over the region for the next 50 years? The Russians never lost WWII; they were the prime reason that the Allies won.

They needed us a lot more than we needed them.

And where did I say they lost?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-