# Vietnam War



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 9, 2017)

Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.

I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.

But at first glance it does seem that a lot of brave young men were let down badly by the politicians and the Generals.

I dont know if the doc is accurate but the impression given is that they just didnt have a clue.

My knowledge of the conflict is poor and mainly taken from the movies.

How did it go so badly ?


----------



## Penelope (Oct 9, 2017)

It was a waste of a war and I saw a few episodes and I do believe its true. Most had no idea what it would be like and as long as it lasted it was a total waste of life.


----------



## AVISSSER (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> How did it go so badly ?


Something about dominoes.


----------



## Correll (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...





Containment was a difficult strategy, especially if the nation in question had land borders with communists nations that you did not want to have open war with.


The guerrilla style of the war was a challenge to an military built around the potential tank battles of WWIII.


AND, the media was a much more powerful and hard to control force.


----------



## Desperado (Oct 9, 2017)

The Vietnam War was a civil war we had no right to be involved in.
Poor leadership, Poor Decisions and over 50,000 dead Americans.
Waste of Blood and Treasure...... I sure hope the politician that got us involved get what is coming to them


----------



## Pete7469 (Oct 9, 2017)

Killing commies is a noble endeavor. I'm ashamed my country has embraced so much socialism, but it looks as if the tide may be turning.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 9, 2017)

Desperado said:


> The Vietnam War was a civil war we had no right to be involved in.
> Poor leadership, Poor Decisions and over 50,000 dead Americans.
> Waste of Blood and Treasure...... I sure hope the politician that got us involved get what is coming to them


What happened when it finished ?
Was there an enquiry ? Were people held to account ?


----------



## MadChemist (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...



The French found out just what strong nationalists the Vietnamese were.  These people had been throwing invaders out of their country for thousands of years.

They were tenacious (or....their leaders really didn't care how many got killed in their efforts).

American didn't realize this.

You also don't enter a war unless you are prepared to kill whoever it takes.  America should have carpet bombed Hanoi.  Cruel, but it would have end the conflict quickly.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Desperado said:
> 
> 
> > The Vietnam War was a civil war we had no right to be involved in.
> ...



No need for an inquiry. The guilty culprits, Kennedy and Johnson were worm food by 1973.


----------



## gipper (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...


War is always about the health of the state. 

You being a flaming statist should know that.


----------



## waltky (Oct 9, 2017)

possum likes it when Uncle Ferd puts up a row o' dominoes...

... so he can knock `em down.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...


Intense micomanagement of the war from the White House all the way down not to mention the daily intel and ops reports (with massive statistical data) that were so extensive that many never were read until long after they were useful as well as much of the reported ops completely useless for prosecuting a wrong war in the wrong place.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 9, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...


What lessons were learned Hoss ?
You still get involved in places you should keep clear from and, Iraq, still seem off the pace in terms of what the reality is on the ground.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Oct 9, 2017)

Vietnam was just another example of American imperialism that blew up in our faces.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


Like with all great powers, yes that includes GB when they were the world's powerhouse, mistakes are often made and not learned from.  It's not surprising.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 9, 2017)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Vietnam was just another example of American imperialism that blew up in our faces.


**sigh**


----------



## Desperado (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Desperado said:
> 
> 
> > The Vietnam War was a civil war we had no right to be involved in.
> ...


When if finished North and South were reunited and the commies tried capitalism.
Just like any American Epic Failure there was no one held responsible, and it there was an inquiry it was a whitewash.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 9, 2017)

Lessons learned from the Vietnam War.

1) Have an end goal and exit strategy.

2) You can't bomb people into the stone age....when they already live in the stone age.

3) People do not like to be invaded and occupied, no matter how nobel the cause.

(also, applies to Iraq and Afghanistan)   ....


----------



## Mindful (Oct 9, 2017)

I heard it said that it was like fighting a ghost in the forest.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 9, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Lessons learned from the Vietnam War.
> 
> 1) Have an end goal and exit strategy.
> 
> ...



How long had they been colonised by the French?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



Lessons were studied and learned by War Colleges and Military Academies but the Presidents between Eisenhower and Trump had to micromanage from the White House. Johnson and Clinton were bumbling fools and Obama couldn't organize a gang bang but he thought he was Napoleon IV. Thankfully, Trump is letting the Pentagon run military matters now.


----------



## gipper (Oct 9, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Lessons learned from the Vietnam War.
> 
> 1) Have an end goal and exit strategy.
> 
> ...


But the lessons are never learned.  The ruling class loves war, but the people don't know it.  They never learn.


----------



## gipper (Oct 9, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


When the pentagon runs things, expect war.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 9, 2017)

gipper said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



What 'things'?


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 9, 2017)

Ringel05 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


GB were very effective in dealing with failure. Islandwhana was hidden by Rorkes Drift. Dunkirk covered up our failure in Europe.
But this seems to be on another level.

In the uk we have just had the Chilcott enquiry into the Iraq war. Blair gave evidence and didnt come out looking too shiny. Is there a similar process in the US ?


----------



## gipper (Oct 9, 2017)

Mindful said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


Military matters.  Read the post I responded to.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 9, 2017)

Gen. Colon Powell was a Vietnam War veteran, who put to pen and paper the lesson's learned during Vietnam.   ......     

The *Powell Doctrine *states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:

Is a vital national security interest threatened?
Do we have a clear attainable objective?
Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
Is the action supported by the American people?
Do we have genuine broad international support?
Powell Doctrine - Wikipedia


----------



## gipper (Oct 9, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Gen. Colon Powell was a Vietnam War veteran, who's lesson's learned and sage advice was basically ignored the White House.   ......
> 
> The *Powell Doctrine *states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:
> 
> ...


How about keeping it simple?  If attacked we fight, as long as our government didn't commit a false flag.  Otherwise, we mind our own business and stay out of other nation's affairs.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


No need, the media and the American people haven't been kind to Bush II about that major mistake called Iraq.  No, it's not on a different level, it's just the same wash, rinse, repeat that has been going on since the very first empire came into being, hell started with the first conflict in history between clans it just appears different because people aren't looking at long past historical events the same way they're viewing current or recent events.  Current and relatively recent events are fresh and raw.  The old saying about not learning from history is just as true today as it ever was, people are people and always will be.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 9, 2017)

gipper said:


> How about keeping it simple?  If attacked we fight, as long as our government didn't commit a false flag.  Otherwise, we mind our own business and stay out of other nation's affairs.


In my opinion, we haven't fought a war in defense of our country since WWll   .....


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Oct 9, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...


Actually the ground war went well we destroyed the insurgents in the 67 tet offensive after that every supposed insurgent was actually a North Vietnamese Regular shipped in. We did not lose until the politicians gave up.


----------



## gipper (Oct 9, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> > How about keeping it simple?  If attacked we fight, as long as our government didn't commit a false flag.  Otherwise, we mind our own business and stay out of other nation's affairs.
> ...


It is my opinion we haven't fought a defensive war since the American Revolution.  Excepting the South, who fought defensively in Lincoln's War.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



Why keep raking over hot coals? It happened.

You may as well analyse to death the War of the Roses, or the gunpowder plot.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Ringel05 said:
> ...


Skye would be proud of that posting.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



What's that got to do with anything?


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...


The politicians looked to be out of their depth. Puzzled because it wasnt a quick win. Afghanistan ?


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...





Mindful said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


We are discussing a fairly recent war on the HISTORY forum. And you want to shut down debate. Thats just dumb.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



Misquoting, and altering the narrative? That's what your type does.

You're not merely "discussing a fairly recent war". Not in an objective way at least. You always have some sort of angle. On anything you discuss.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


Stop trolling the thread.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

`
`
I recently just watched all ten, 1 hr 20 min, installments of the PBS documentary; The Vietnam War. Very sobering. It's funny how the US is now making those same damn mistakes in the ME right now.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> I recently just watched all ten, 1 hr 20 min, installments of the PBS documentary; The Vietnam War. Very sobering. It's funny how the US is now making those same damn mistakes in the ME right now.


You dont see the protests these days. Is it because it is on a smaller scale or perhaps there is support for the current intiiatives ?


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> You dont see the protests these days. Is it because it is on a smaller scale or perhaps there is support for the current intiiatives ?


`
I'm not referring to the protests per se. Americans have become so ignorant, deluded and self-centered, the idea of war and the horrors of war, mean nothing to them. But perhaps that is a good point, the 60s/70s appears to be the last gasp of the American conscience. So long as or troops death count is so low, no one cares, left or right.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


The only thing that we got wrong in Afghanistan was getting distracted by Iraq drawing valuable resources away from Afghanistan which allowed the Taliban and al-Qaida to regroup into somewhat effective guerrilla organizations.  If we had kept up the pressure that would have been a different story, they would have been completely neutralized being trapped in the mountains under constant attack and unable to respond in any real significant manner and eventually starved out.
Al-Qaida and Bin-Laden wanted the US (and our western allies) to invade somewhere in the ME, Iran or Iraq because they believed the whole of the Muslim ME would rise up against us with all the holy places in those two countries.  What they didn't want or expect was our going after them in Afghanistan, a relatively insignificant country as far as even Muslims are concerned, that took them by surprise.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > You dont see the protests these days. Is it because it is on a smaller scale or perhaps there is support for the current intiiatives ?
> ...


Its strange that the Iraq war is seen as toxic over here but not so much in the US.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Ringel05 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...


Nobody wins in the Stan.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


No, the coalition simply replaced the repressive Taliban with a tribal leader which should eventually fall apart but so far hasn't.  With the election in 2014 and  Ahmadzai swearing in his rival as Vice President averting potential conflict between north and south Afghanistan things are looking promising.  Of course there is still the Taliban who are only strong enough to apply the occasional terror tactics but that's to be expected.  Whether the north-south political coalition survives is yet to be seen, Afghanistan is still heavily tribal.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 10, 2017)

Ringel05 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Ringel05 said:
> ...


Fingers crossed. It will take a while to reverse 50 years of savagery.
1960’s Afghanistan Was Very Different Before The Taliban


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...



It is very accurate.


----------



## Ringel05 (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Ringel05 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


It goes back centuries, the Taliban is just a fairly recent manifestation.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 10, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...



Nixon ran on "I have a plan", that being to end the war in Vietnam; this promise was the theme of his campaign during the summer of 1969.  His plan, seems to have been, to expand the war into Cambodian and Laos and spend months arguing about the shape of the table at the Paris Peace Talks.

Four years later he was reelected notwithstanding the continuous body count of  our troops.  It was IKE who sent the first advisors into Vietnam, too bad Hossfly needs to lie, but that's what right wingers always seem to do.


----------



## Camp (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > You dont see the protests these days. Is it because it is on a smaller scale or perhaps there is support for the current intiiatives ?
> ...


American boys were drafted to serve and die in Vietnam. Everyone had a neighbor, classmate, friend, or local who came home in a box. Not knowing for sure what the war was accomplishing led even hardcore patriotic Americans to question the war. It also meant many of the protesters had personal connections to the soldiers being sent to Vietnam. Not lost on the public was the fact that kids from families with the ability to pay for college were finding ways to avoid service and going to war.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> You dont see the protests these days. Is it because it is on a smaller scale or perhaps there is support for the current intiiatives ?


The main reason for the lack of protests is that we currently have an all volunteer army.

During the Vietnam War the ranks of the military was mainly filled with conscripts, known as the "draft". The war never was popular with the majority of the young people, who were the one's expected to go, fight, and possibly die. Eventually, even the average citizen started turning against the war, when kids in their neighborhood started coming home in body bags from a far off war being fought over ideology.   ....


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Its strange that the Iraq war is seen as toxic over here but not so much in the US.


`
`
The US obviously doesn't learn from it's mistakes. Like in Vietnam, no one except for the criminal governments in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, want the US there.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Fingers crossed. It will take a while to reverse 50 years of savagery.
> 1960’s Afghanistan Was Very Different Before The Taliban


War is the national sport of Afghanistan. 

They are a proud people who refuse to be conquered.    .....


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...



At one point the Vietcong had  superior Russian made weapons. Did  you see the part where the US soldiers' guns jammed during heavy artillery fire?

Resulting in much loss of life.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> At one point the Vietcong had  superior Russian made weapons. Did  you see the part where the US soldiers' guns jammed during heavy artillery fire?


Incorrect.....the Soviet weapons were never superior to American weapons.

The jamming incident happened when the new M-16 rifle was first introduced to into the conflict. A change of gunpowder formula, hard chroming various metal parts, and the introduction of cleaning kits, resolved the jamming issues. Resulting in a world class weapon, who's basic design is still used today.   ...


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > At one point the Vietcong had  superior Russian made weapons. Did  you see the part where the US soldiers' guns jammed during heavy artillery fire?
> ...



They must have been, if they didn't jam.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Camp said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



According to the documentary, many of those young men _wanted _to go and fight in Vietnam. One family they focused on, he gave up academia to join up.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



Another diversionary tactic for your dishonesty.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> I recently just watched all ten, 1 hr 20 min, installments of the PBS documentary; The Vietnam War. Very sobering. It's funny how the US is now making those same damn mistakes in the ME right now.



It's a different scenario, context. Vietnam was an ideological war. And the Vietnamese were used to handling the forests, jungles etc. 

Though Americans  fighting the Arabs in their own arid desert terrain is difficult, as even The Crusaders realised, so far back in history.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> According to the documentary, many of those young men _wanted _to go and fight in Vietnam. One family they focused on, he gave up academia to join up.


Early to mid 1960's, the war was seen as a patriot duty and many joined up.

Later in the war, late 60's early 70's, the bulk of the military was composed of unenthusiastic conscripts. Who had no desire to be there, let alone die there.   ....


----------



## Camp (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


You are using arbitrary and misinformed posts to try and make your points. If anyone is trolling it is you. Anyhow, this thread was started by Tommy not you.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > According to the documentary, many of those young men _wanted _to go and fight in Vietnam. One family they focused on, he gave up academia to join up.
> ...



I'm aware of that. But so many were eager to go. As the film makes clear, with personal interviews.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Camp said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



So what? The way you talk, I thought you were the OP.

TT is legendary for his style of argument. I'm sure he can manage  on his own, without backup from you.

My misinformed posts come  from "The Vietnam War" documentary.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 10, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...


A management failure?  

Fallacies of false Cause is what the right wing is best at; they prefer to allege a subscription to a domino theory; the left wing prefers the "status quo" of a "domino fallacy".


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> I'm aware of that. But so many were eager to go. As the film makes clear, with personal interviews.


I do not care what the film says or shows. And they sure the hell didn't interview me or anyone I know.

I was one of those people who was drafted 1970-71, along with many of my high school friends. I can assure you that by that time, which was late in the war. Neither me, or any of my friends were looking forward to going to Vietnam, let alone signing up.   .....


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 10, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > I'm aware of that. But so many were eager to go. As the film makes clear, with personal interviews.
> ...


I believe our Ninth Amendment applied.  There was no formal declaration of war.  Letters of marque and reprisal, or war, is what Congress is, literally delegated, by the People.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> According to the documentary, many of those young men _wanted _to go and fight in Vietnam. One family they focused on, he gave up academia to join up.


`
One thing I've learned that correlates with what the documentary said;  to my knowledge, Jane Fonda is universally hated by Vietnam vets.


----------



## GHook93 (Oct 10, 2017)

It was a civil war and we shouldn’t have gone in the way we did. However fighting the spread of communism was a worthy and just cause, so we should have supported the South Vietnamese financially, with weapons, air support and a no fly zone. We actually won the war, but we then allowed it to slip away. The North actually signed a peace Treaty Jan 27, 1973. NV gov agreed to this once we FINALLY took the fighting to the North. Nixon’s escalation into the North, Cambodia and Laos wasn’t popular but it was a necessary and decisive move that won us the war and forced the North to sign a peace treaty. Not to mention the huge strategic tet offensive blunder that effectively destroyed the VC!

We made a commitment to arm the SVA. However after Nixon resigned and the Demorats took Congress, the Dems went back on this promise. We didn’t arm the SVA and we pulled out most of the peace keeping troops. We gave them the South on a silver platter. It was dishonorable and cowardly. 

The NVA saw this and invaded! If we just kept our promise and left in peace keeping troops then the history books would have been written much differently. The VC was effectively destroyed and the NVA would have never went in if we kept our word. 

We would have seen a resurgent South Vietnam and a faltering North Vietnam, much the same way we see in Korea!

It is a damn shame

https://www.prageru.com/sites/defau...he_truth_about_the_vietnam_war-transcript.pdf
The Truth about the Vietnam War


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> One thing I've learned that correlates with what the documentary said;  to my knowledge, Jane Fonda is universally hated by Vietnam vets.


Although, I was in agreement with Fonda's public protests to end the war.

But when she went to North Vietnam and gleefully smiled and clapped her hands while seated on a soviet weapon used to shoot down American aircraft. She crossed the line and should have been charged with treason.  ....


----------



## Skull Pilot (Oct 10, 2017)

The US government wasted the lives of 58220 American soldiers and ruined the lives of tens of thousands more in nothing but a game of political brinkmanship.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

GHook93 said:


> It was a civil war and we shouldn’t have gone in the way we did. However fighting the spread of communism was a worthy and just cause, so we should have supported the South Vietnamese financially, with weapons, air support and a no fly zone. We actually won the war, but we then allowed it to slip away. The North actually signed a peace Treaty Jan 27, 1973. NV gov agreed to this once we FINALLY took the fighting to the North. Nixon’s escalation into the North, Cambodia and Laos wasn’t popular but it was a necessary and decisive move that won us the war and forced the North to sign a peace treaty. Not to mention the huge strategic tet offensive blunder that effectively destroyed the VC!
> 
> We made a commitment to arm the SVA. However after Nixon resigned and the Demorats took Congress, the Dems went back on this promise. We didn’t arm the SVA and we pulled out most of the peace keeping troops. We gave them the South on a silver platter. It was dishonorable and cowardly.
> 
> ...


The North Vietnamese were highly trained and dedicated nationalistic soldiers who were willing to fight to the death for generations in order to free their country from foreign occupation.

The South Vietnamese soldiers in general, lacked that kind of fervor and dedication.  .....


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > According to the documentary, many of those young men _wanted _to go and fight in Vietnam. One family they focused on, he gave up academia to join up.
> ...



Hanoi Jane they called her


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



I recall the M-14 had that problem, is that what they referenced?


----------



## GHook93 (Oct 10, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > It was a civil war and we shouldn’t have gone in the way we did. However fighting the spread of communism was a worthy and just cause, so we should have supported the South Vietnamese financially, with weapons, air support and a no fly zone. We actually won the war, but we then allowed it to slip away. The North actually signed a peace Treaty Jan 27, 1973. NV gov agreed to this once we FINALLY took the fighting to the North. Nixon’s escalation into the North, Cambodia and Laos wasn’t popular but it was a necessary and decisive move that won us the war and forced the North to sign a peace treaty. Not to mention the huge strategic tet offensive blunder that effectively destroyed the VC!
> ...



Some what true. They were fierce fighters, however so were the North Koreans, but in that war we brought the fighting straight to the North right away. If the Chinese didn’t send in troops there would have never been a North Korea. That was the precise reason we stayed out of the North, Cambodia and Laos for so long.

Once we took the fight to them, the war changed and the North Vietnamese signed a peace treaty. Once they saw America had no political will to back it they hit the war path again.  

If we backed the plan and allowed the South time to build their military then it would have e been different.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



I think so. The north Vietnamese had the AK 47.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

GHook93 said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...



Not to forget how corrupt the leaders of the South became.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

`
`
The documentary drove home one salient point; the US knew from the start, they could never win a military victory in Vietnam....and yet, the lie of victory is what they fed the public....to the tune of over 50,000 American troops and over 2,000,000 South East Asians, dead.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> The documentary drove home one salient point; the US knew from the start, they could never win a military victory in Vietnam....and yet, the lie of victory is what they fed the public....to the tune of over 50,000 American troops and over 2,000,000 South East Asians, dead.



A lot of the blame lies with General Westmoreland, now deceased.

Today’s list: The top ten reasons Gen. Westmoreland lost the war in Vietnam


----------



## whitehall (Oct 10, 2017)

I didn't watch it but I bet the guy with a haircut like a ten year old didn't bring up LBJ's lies and fake crisis and the fact that he set the rules so that we could win every battle and still lose the war and blame it on Nixon. The crazy part is just when LBJ's insane policy of wearing down an enemy that had been fighting for decades, was working he gave up in a tearful address to Americans and general Giap was able to recruit replacements that he lost during Tet.


----------



## GHook93 (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> The documentary drove home one salient point; the US knew from the start, they could never win a military victory in Vietnam....and yet, the lie of victory is what they fed the public....to the tune of over 50,000 American troops and over 2,000,000 South East Asians, dead.



That is when you should have discounted the show as liberal propaganda. We in fact had it won, until Dems backed out of promises 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Decus (Oct 10, 2017)

Both Democrat presidents - Kennedy and Johnson- were strongly anti-communist. Kennedy felt that he couldn't allow SE Asian countries like Laos and Vietnam to fall to communist domination - his belief followed along the lines of "bear any burden" to keep them free. His approach was a mix of military as well as economic support for Vietnam.

Johnson was more interested in a military solution and increased troop numbers and initiated bombing campaigns.

Kennedy and Johnson were both instrumental in our decision to go to war with North Vietnam and the subsequent loss of life.

.


----------



## SSGT Bags (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > `
> ...


You obviously do not know


whitehall said:


> I didn't watch it but I bet the guy with a haircut like a ten year old didn't bring up LBJ's lies and fake crisis and the fact that he set the rules so that we could win every battle and still lose the war and blame it on Nixon. The crazy part is just when LBJ's insane policy of wearing down an enemy that had been fighting for decades, was working he gave up in a tearful address to Americans and general Giap was able to recruit replacements that he lost during Tet.



what the hell you are talking about!
The entire blame lies solely in the hands of LBJ and Robert macnamara.
These two twits with no military experience mad Vietnam a war of "attrition."
Meaning, let's say there were 250,000 NVA,
If we kill 250,000, we will win.
What these idiots forgot was that every year, more people turned 18, and joined the NVA.
DOY!
That's why daily body counts were so important.
And, if you want a real education, just google Macnamara's 100,000.
He drafted 100,000 with low IQ's into the Army.
There was a unit of them going through basic training next to me in July 1969.
My basic was 8 weeks, their's was 16 weeks,  
Can you say cannon fodder?


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

`
`
Too his only credit, Nixon knew (politically) we had to get out of Vietnam. Unfortunately, there was no easy way to do it.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

GHook93 said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > `
> ...



I've heard that said about the director. Do you think it was biased?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 10, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > At one point the Vietcong had  superior Russian made weapons. Did  you see the part where the US soldiers' guns jammed during heavy artillery fire?
> ...



   The jamming problem happened with the Marines in 1965. The Army didn't have that problem and there was a simple explanation.
   The Army infantry loaded the magazines with 1 tracer round every 6 rounds and everyone could see where their firing was most effective and concentrated their fire on the most vital targets. However, the Marine infantry would have their firing directed by the squad leader and fire team leaders by firing tracer rounds where they wanted the squad to concentrate their fire. The riflemen did not load tracers in their magazines and after firing many magazines of ammo the bolts wouldn't close even though there was a forward assist assembly for the bolt.
    The Armalite Company sent technicians to Army and Marine units to find out why the Army didn't have jamming problems but Marine units did. They discovered that the tracer rounds, upon being fired would burn out the carbon from the chamber and barrel of the M-16, eliminating jamming and stoppages. The techs brought this to the attention of the Marine Corps who adopted the Army's method and that solved the problem. Anyone who was in Vietnam in 1965 will remember that.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 10, 2017)

`
`
Wasn't the M-16, originally, a fully automatic rifle?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 10, 2017)

GHook93 said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > `
> ...



Correct. We had it won and would have won if Nixon hadn't chickened out. Kissinger had Hanoi all ready to surrender until Nixon suddenly remembered how the Japanese sent a surrender party to the British in Singapore and damned if the Brits didn't wind up surrendering instead. So instead of accepting Hanoi's surrender, Nixon decided to pull out of Vietnam instead. What a clusterfuck that became.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 10, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> `
> `
> Wasn't the M-16, originally, a fully automatic rifle?



No, it had a selector switch.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 10, 2017)

SSGT Bags said:


> He drafted 100,000 with low IQ's into the Army. There was a unit of them going through basic training next to me in July 1969. My basic was 8 weeks, their's was 16 weeks,
> Can you say cannon fodder?


Sounds like a pure BS story to me.  .....


----------



## SSGT Bags (Oct 10, 2017)

Mindful said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


What the heck are you talking about?
Obvious neophyte here!
What does artillery fire have to do with infantry weapons?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 10, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


Your right about Ike sending advisors to Vietnam, but only to advise, not to fight. The bastard, Kennedy, escalated the war and Johnson and his micromanaging created a clusterfuck.  Hossfly doesn't lie so get that thought out of your empty liberal skull.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 10, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Vietnam was a "clusterfuck" from the moment Diem claimed his leadership, and in the Trumpian way claimed he won with over 95% of the vote.  Pointing fingers at JFK and LBJ is  AT BEST a half-truth, and a half-truth, like a lie by omission, is still an effort to mislead and thus a lie.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

SSGT Bags said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



I was going by what was said in the film, and the impressions of one particular battle. That's what I was talking about.

I don't know what a neophyte is. Don't bother. I'll look it up.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 10, 2017)

Okay. New to the details, despite that war being a background to my life.

You could explain stuff with less aggression.


----------



## there4eyeM (Oct 10, 2017)

Vietnam was the bad guys fighting the bad guys, with neither side understanding the other. Sheer idiocy.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 10, 2017)

Sunni Man said:


> SSGT Bags said:
> 
> 
> > He drafted 100,000 with low IQ's into the Army. There was a unit of them going through basic training next to me in July 1969. My basic was 8 weeks, their's was 16 weeks,
> ...



Actually, Sunni Man the problem started in late 1966 when judges around the country started sweeping the streets and ordering criminals to either go to jail or join a service. I saw many, many draftees and recruits from those who couldn't read or write up to college grads who could barely read or write. It got worse right up to 1977 when I retired and didn't have to put up with those knuckleheads any more. In late '66-early '68 and late '74 to Dec '77 I could write a book about those pathetic humans. Up until 1966 a single male had to have an AFQT of 60 to join the military and from then until I got out in late '77, it dropped to 10. Imagine having an IQ of 10! SSGT Bags was correct. The trainees in '69 took Basic and AIT together if they were in that low AFQT group making it 16 weeks. The last 3 years before retiring I was 1Sgt of Special Training Company. (We called it Shirley Temple Company) I would have as many as 500 trainees in my company and each week we would graduate about 100 and receive about 100 newbies. Upon arrival the newbies would arrive by bus and when they got off I would have them line up, drop their bags and strip to their shorts. Then, my 15 DIs would search their gear and generally come up with a bunch of  pistols, knives and brass knuckles. I won't go any further but you can see what king of tripe we had to deal with.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 10, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


I happened to be in the Army when Ike was President until the Plains Peanut Farmer was around and I and everyone who was around then knows that Kennedy was worthless cause he's the one that started the crap that ended with Obammy and Johnson was an asshole. No finger pointing, just stating facts.


----------



## xyz (Oct 10, 2017)

SSGT Bags said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


I did not see the documentary, but it seems they were fired upon from that phrase.


----------



## Desperado (Oct 10, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



All Presidents that served during the Vietnam War have blood on their hands and not one of them gets a pass, they are all responsible.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 11, 2017)

It's good to get some real testimony, from people who were actually there, in the military.


----------



## Windparadox (Oct 11, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Correct. We had it won and would have won if Nixon hadn't chickened out. Kissinger had Hanoi all ready to surrender until Nixon suddenly remembered how the Japanese sent a surrender party to the British in Singapore and damned if the Brits didn't wind up surrendering instead. So instead of accepting Hanoi's surrender, Nixon decided to pull out of Vietnam instead. What a clusterfuck that became.


`
I've read a lot of things about Vietnam, listened to hours of stories told to me by the vets who where there but I never heard anyone with your theory.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 11, 2017)

All these accounts; which led me on to read up on military blunders:

From ancient times to the present day, battles have been lost to dire weather, insufficient weaponry and bad luck. But what about those for which poor judgment and bad planning are to blame?

Historian Rupert Matthews says.

*Any fool can lose a battle. All you need to have is a weaker army than your opponent. What takes a special talent is to lose a battle when you start off with all the advantages in your own hands.

Some commanders have managed to throw away the power of greater numbers, strong positions and superior weaponry with blunders of such awesome scale that they have ended up losing a battle that, logically, they should have won with ease.*


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 11, 2017)

Windparadox said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Correct. We had it won and would have won if Nixon hadn't chickened out. Kissinger had Hanoi all ready to surrender until Nixon suddenly remembered how the Japanese sent a surrender party to the British in Singapore and damned if the Brits didn't wind up surrendering instead. So instead of accepting Hanoi's surrender, Nixon decided to pull out of Vietnam instead. What a clusterfuck that became.
> ...


No theory, just hard, cold facts. The troops who were there knew what happened and who was to blame.


----------



## GHook93 (Oct 11, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Bring to the liberal to put Trump in the Vietnam discussion.

JFK and LBJ started and escalated our involvement in the war, so yes they are the main culprits in this conflict. Additionally they provided the loser strategy of not engaging the North in the North, Cambodia and Laos, simply because they were afraid of China 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

Correll said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...


We have a Commerce Clause.  Y'all on the right wing make it seem like you don't really believe in Capitalism and prefer the command economics of socialism on a national basis.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

Pete7469 said:


> Killing commies is a noble endeavor. I'm ashamed my country has embraced so much socialism, but it looks as if the tide may be turning.


Did you know, socialism requires social morals for free and not capital morals for a market friendly price?


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Desperado said:
> 
> 
> > The Vietnam War was a civil war we had no right to be involved in.
> ...


The private industrial sector was probably too busy "retooling for a warfare-State".


----------



## tyroneweaver (Oct 11, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...





Hossfly said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Desperado said:
> ...


Just burued a church member this month. Agent Orange


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

gipper said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...


I agree to disagree.  War is about command economics, not free markets.  Only the right wing, never gets it.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 11, 2017)

GHook93 said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Wow, not only poor syntax, but an example of total historical ignorance.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


Under our form of Capitalism, a profit motive must be involved.



> In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people, personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore, we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.



Real times of War should require real times of War tax rates; or, it is just more wealth redistribution where capitalists can exploit their capital wealth, at the expense of the poor.



> According to the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and 2007 incomes of the top 1% of Americans grew by an average of 275%. During the same time period, the 60% of Americans in the middle of the income scale saw their income rise by 40%. From 1992-2007 the top 400 income earners in the U.S. saw their income increase 392% and their average tax rate reduced by 37%.[15] In 2009, the average income of the top 1% was $960,000 with a minimum income of $343,927.[16][17][18]
> 
> During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.[17] According to PolitiFact and others, the top 400 wealthiest Americans "have more wealth than half of all Americans combined."[19][20][21][22] Inherited wealth may help explain why many Americans who have become rich may have had a "substantial head start".[23][24] In September 2012, according to the Institute for Policy Studies, "over 60 percent" of the Forbes richest 400 Americans "grew up in substantial privilege".[25]
> 
> If a family has a positive net worth then it has more wealth than the combined net worth of over 30.6 million American families. This is because the bottom 25% of American families have a negative combined net worth.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

Would we have the same policies, if real times of War require real times of War tax rates? 

We could be thanking the right for wanting to keep us out of War, by lowering taxes.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 11, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


The syntax was correct, complete and concise. I was there for a couple of tours. Where were you?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 11, 2017)

tyroneweaver said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


 
So sad. Agent Orange killed me in Viet Nam. I just havent died yet.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 11, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> gipper said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



War is generally the failure of diplomacy,   In the case of the Vietnam War, it was bungled from the start, the abnormal fear of communism - evident even today - and the lack of courage of elected officials along with their egos, led directly to the cataclysm of this war.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Oct 11, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...



'67 - '69 mostly aboard a DD on ASW Patrol, working in the Ship's Office and responding to the 1MC when called upon to run to the  5" gun wherein I was the Projectile Man.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 11, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Windparadox said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


Who was to blame for the French position at Dien Bien Phu?

Did any management from Normandy neglect, "military castle doctrine"?


----------



## Mindful (Oct 11, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > SSGT Bags said:
> ...



Just picked this one up,which sort of fits into your narrative.

Jimi Hendrix was given a choice, facing either prison or joining the military.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 11, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Windparadox said:
> ...




In both cases, it's hard to pin down. It was either Bush's or Trump's fault.

The French employed ignorance, arrogance and poor planning among other things. The Froggies thought the Viet Minh lacked anti-aircraft ability. DBP was suppose to be resupplied by air. Big booboo. All their planes got shot down. 

Military Castle Doctrine? Waddaya mean? Castle Doctrine or "Stand Your Ground Law" I understand. What is "military castle doctrine?"


----------



## tyroneweaver (Oct 11, 2017)

Wry Catcher said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


71-73 MP that just guarded ordinance
Place was busy when nixon was bombing the north


----------



## Mindful (Oct 11, 2017)

What were the French doing there in the first place?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 11, 2017)

]Sunni Man[/USER] the problem started in late 1966 when judges around the country started sweeping the streets and ordering criminals to either go to jail or join a service. I saw many, many draftees and recruits from those who couldn't read or write up to college grads who could barely read or write. It got worse right up to 1977 when I retired and didn't have to put up with those knuckleheads any more. In late '66-early '68 and late '74 to Dec '77 I could write a book about those pathetic humans. Up until 1966 a single male had to have an AFQT of 60 to join the military and from then until I got out in late '77, it dropped to 10. Imagine having an IQ of 10! SSGT Bags was correct. The trainees in '69 took Basic and AIT together if they were in that low AFQT group making it 16 weeks. The last 3 years before retiring I was 1Sgt of Special Training Company. (We called it Shirley Temple Company) I would have as many as 500 trainees in my company and each week we would graduate about 100 and receive about 100 newbies. Upon arrival the newbies would arrive by bus and when they got off I would have them line up, drop their bags and strip to their shorts. Then, my 15 DIs would search their gear and generally come up with a bunch of  pistols, knives and brass knuckles. I won't go any further but you can see what king of tripe we had to deal with.[/QUOTE]

Just picked this one up,which sort of fits into your narrative.

Jimi Hendrix was given a choice, facing either prison or joining the military.[/QUOTE]


Mindful said:


> What were the French doing there in the first place?



French Indo-China. French Colonial Possession 1887-1954


----------



## gipper (Oct 11, 2017)

A buddy of mine was an Army Ranger.  His job was to locate and rescue downed pilots.  He has some amazingly hair raising stories.  He was nearly killed or captured many times.  The downed pilot often was so stressed out with fear or from injury, he would kill his rescuer.  My buddy said he often had to sneak up on the pilot and physically control him, for fear he would kill him.  He did this at the ripe old age of 19....and had no fear.  He said he loved it.

This is why war is a young man's game.  They can be trained to ignore the danger, even thrive on it, and do as ordered.


----------



## gipper (Oct 11, 2017)

Mindful said:


> What were the French doing there in the first place?


They shouldn't have been there.  Either should have the USA.


----------



## Mindful (Oct 11, 2017)

gipper said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > What were the French doing there in the first place?
> ...



Tells me a lot. Thanks.


----------



## BuckToothMoron (Oct 11, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...



Off the top of my head, and relying only on my limited knowledge, I’d would suggest that there was no intent to win, no plan on for the end game, no political commitment to win, no definition of success. The war seemed to escalate and President Johnson never had a vision which made it impossible for him to lead.


----------



## Camp (Oct 11, 2017)

That war and era of American history will be debated forever. The debating points don't seem to have changed since the 60's and 70's.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 12, 2017)

Hossfly said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


In historic times, castles were used to establish, "zones of control" to deny and disparage the enemy within that zone.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 12, 2017)

Mindful said:


> What were the French doing there in the first place?


Just "waiting to goad us into it"'; after all, we built the Panama canal.

Unfortunately, under Capitalism, past performance is no guarantee of future results.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 12, 2017)

gipper said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > What were the French doing there in the first place?
> ...


Should we "blame Madison" and the Republican Doctrine?


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 12, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


Yes.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Oct 23, 2017)

Its the retreat from Saigon tonight. Nixon in trouble and soldiers throwing away their medals.
Very raw.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Oct 23, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Its the retreat from Saigon tonight. Nixon in trouble and soldiers throwing away their medals.
> Very raw.



anybody who has done research on this topic knows that it wasnt the NVA or the vietcong that murdered those 58,000 americans.It was those bastards Lyndon Johnson and DICK Nixon.What pisses me off is brainwashed americans fall for the propaganda all these years later that Nixon ended the war.No the AMERICAN PEOPLE ended the war and that was the ONLY thing that got Nixon to take action.

Had he had his way and stayed in office it would have gone on for another 8 years if not for the american people standing  up to our corrupt government.Nixon COULD have ended the war in 69 had he wanted to,but the bastard let it go on for another four more years and people treat him like a freaking hero.

Had JFK lived,there NEVER would have been a vietnam war.It was no secret that he had intentions to pull out completely by 1965.That is documented.that is not a mystery anymore that once LBJ got in office,he reversed Kennedys policy on vietnam.

Here is the REAL story on vietnam,this is a book EVERYONE on this thread should read.


American Tragedy: Kennedy, Johnson, and the Origins of the Vietnam War by David E. Kaiser
"American Tragedy" is the first book to draw on complete official documentation to tell the full story of how we became involved in Vietnam--and the story it tells decisively challenges widely held assumptions about the roles of Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. Using an enormous range of source materials from these administrations, Kaiser shows how the policies that led to the war were developed during Eisenhower's tenure and nearly implemented in the closing days of his administration in response to a crisis in Laos; how Kennedy immediately reversed course on Laos and refused for three years to follow recommendations for military action in Southeast Asia; and how Eisenhower's policies reemerged in the military intervention mounted by the Johnson administration.
American Tragedy: Kennedy, Johnson, and the Origins of the Vietnam War by David E. Kaiser


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Oct 23, 2017)

gipper said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



you nailed it.and if you dont give them their wars they thirst for,you pay the price kennedy paid. Eisenhower despite how corrupt he was,in the end of his term to his credit, warned the american people to be aware of the military industrial complex that craved for wars.

I recently just watched all ten, 1 hr 20 min, installments of the PBS documentary; The Vietnam War. Very sobering. It's funny how the US is now making those same damn mistakes in the ME right now.


thats the EDITED version of our corrupt government of course.They always leave out the facts presented in Kaisers well documented book.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Oct 23, 2017)

Skull Pilot said:


> The US government wasted the lives of 58220 American soldiers and ruined the lives of tens of thousands more in nothing but a game of political brinkmanship.





what the hell you are talking about!
The entire blame lies solely in the hands of LBJ and Robert macnamara.
These two twits with no military experience mad Vietnam a war of "attrition."
Meaning, let's say there were 250,000 NVA,
If we kill 250,000, we will win.
What these idiots forgot was that every year, more people turned 18, and joined the NVA.
DOY!
That's why daily body counts were so important.
And, if you want a real education, just google Macnamara's 100,000.
He drafted 100,000 with low IQ's into the Army.
There was a unit of them going through basic training next to me in July 1969.
My basic was 8 weeks, their's was 16 weeks,
Can you say cannon fodder?


whitehall is a troll,anytime you post pesky facts that the CIA killed JFK,he gets angry and puts you on ignore for shooting down his fairy tales that oswald shot JFK.lol


----------



## usmcstinger (Oct 25, 2017)

Correll said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...



In Northern I Corps we fought North Vietnam's Army! No VC there!


----------



## SSGT Bags (Oct 25, 2017)

LA RAM FAN said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> > The US government wasted the lives of 58220 American soldiers and ruined the lives of tens of thousands more in nothing but a game of political brinkmanship.
> ...


what gives you the right to cut and paste my post


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 25, 2017)

usmcstinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



Same thing in the Delta in '69-'70 and Cambodia in '70. In '65 we fought NVA in the Ia Drang Valley.


----------



## Correll (Oct 25, 2017)

usmcstinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



But fighting as guerrillas while the US was there in force is my understanding.


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 26, 2017)

Regime change EBT cards; it is the capital and cost effective way!

Just the Bass, no Treble.


----------



## Hossfly (Oct 26, 2017)

Correll said:


> usmcstinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



The VC were all over the country, well organized into three types of offense:

1. Local VC who were recruiters, spies, saboteurs, etc.
2. Regional militia types who operated at night and merged with the        population during the day. 
3. Regular Forces "Hardcore VC", well trained, uniformed, well disciplined and willing to fight openly.

All these were controlled by the NVA, would search for and fight pitched battles with US forces.


----------



## usmcstinger (Oct 26, 2017)

Correll said:


> usmcstinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




I was there! Your understanding is wrong.


----------



## longknife (Oct 26, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...



The biggest problem was generals who could not perform their duties as they had been trained due to micromanagement from the White House.


----------



## usmcstinger (Oct 26, 2017)

longknife said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...


Amen Brother


----------



## GHook93 (Oct 26, 2017)

danielpalos said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



What the hell does the commerce clause have to do here? What a brain dead comment. You must be black!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 27, 2017)

GHook93 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


lol.  You must be on the right wing.  We have a Commerce Clause in our Constitution, there are no, crime, drug, or terror clauses.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 27, 2017)

longknife said:


> The biggest problem was generals who could not perform their duties as they had been trained due to micromanagement from the White House.


It was a total  cluster fuck from the get-go.   .....    

1) The generals, lead by Gen. Westmoreland, were using conventional WWll tactics and strategies to fight an insurgent enemy who was using guerrilla jungle tactics.

2) The Sec. of Defense Robert McNamara had assembled a group of Harvard MBA management eggheads known as the "Wiz Kids", who thought they could win the war using spread sheets and statistics.

3) And a president, Johnson, who didn't have a clue as to what to do about the war.  ....


----------



## danielpalos (Oct 27, 2017)

Yet, they went ahead, and spent the other Peoples' money, anyway.  coincidence or conspiracy.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Oct 27, 2017)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> 
> I will have to watch it again when the house is quieter.
> 
> ...



The Vietnamese War was pure arrogance. The US still has this arrogance, but will avoid jungle warfare and stick to places, like Iraq, against weak opposition, where it knows it can win. Venezuela is safe.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Oct 29, 2017)

longknife said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Just watching Ken Burns doc on the bbc.
> ...



yeah with those bastards LBJ and DICK Nixon is it any wonder?

strange how post# 134  of mine got ignored.very few people realise thats what really transpired.


----------

