Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 9/20/2005 9:55:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 9:57:49 AM EDT by r3ydium]
Vietnam: - yeah i know i might be opening a BIG can of worms here . . . .

First let me state this: - im 21 - And wasnt alive during this conflict - nor do I personally know anyone that fought in this war . . . .

The reason i bring this up: - In school I was in a debate class - And my group faced the hardest subject handed out that day - "Vietnam" -

I recently got into an argument with a guy about vietnam - "Should we have gone to vietnam?"

I have my opionon's - And I personally feel we should have been there - But congress/media/everyone shouldnt have tied our hands and let us clean house like the original plan was - could have been over in 6 months with 1/4 of the casualities -

how does everyone else feel about this ?

(please dont flame me b/c of my ideas . . . im just curious as to everyone elses thoughts)
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:01:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 10:01:55 AM EDT by KlubMarcus]
Should've kept going. Can you imagine President Reagan taking over as CIC during Vietnam? Oh yeah baby! Remember, more people died in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and neighboring areas AFTER the US military left.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:01:44 AM EDT
communism was alive and well so we had to fight it wherever it threatened freedom...
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:05:40 AM EDT
Im glad to see a few people share my thoughts . . . .

And yes it would have bee sweet if Reagan (one of the, if not the greatest president ever . . . ) - would have been sweet to see him take over . . . .
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:07:36 AM EDT
Communism was there.
Containment was our policy.
We had to fight - I can't say I would have volunteered, but if I was drafted, I would have served without any bitching.

FWIW - I am 20, was not alive during Nam.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:09:36 AM EDT
we should have kicked the french out after WW2...
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:32:46 AM EDT
I think the main goal of the war was to stop the spread of communism - and not necessarily to stop communism in Viet Nam. If the US didn't fight that war, more countries would've fell to communist rule and we would've had a bigger problem to deal with.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 10:39:04 AM EDT
I did some study into the begining of the war, even before the Viet Mihn defeated the french. It's very interesting how that went down....
From what I've read Ho Chi Mihn desperately asked for help from the US to help win independance for his country. He even asked the US state dept. to help write their consitution. But, there were concerns that communists might take control of France. So the ruling party in France said they would keep the communists out if we helped them in Vietnam. So we did, and Ho Chi Mihn was forced to seek help from Communist China, and the soviet union.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:27:59 AM EDT
The North was ready to quit from the constant bombing of the cities in the North. The commies in America cried so loud we quit bombing. They should have kept up the bombing and wiped out their infrastructure.

I'm glad America went to Vietnam. If they didn't I would be living in Communist Vietnam or dead. I got out in 1975, I was 6 months old.

Thanks to all the vets, especially Vietnam vets.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:31:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KDragon:
The North was ready to quit from the constant bombing of the cities in the North. The commies in America cried so loud we quit bombing. They should have kept up the bombing and wiped out their infrastructure.

I'm glad America went to Vietnam. If they didn't I would be living in Communist Vietnam or dead. I got out in 1975, I was 6 months old.

Thanks to all the vets, especially Vietnam vets.



The VC ceased to exist after 1968 Tet. NVA was ready to give it up, but the NV leaders knew they were winning the PR war in the US. One general actually said that people like Fonda encouraged them to continue.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:34:44 AM EDT
some theorize that the entire war could have been avoided had we just helped NV create the democratic replublic(based on the US constitution) they wanted back in the 50s. But NOOOO we wanted to keep the god damn French happy.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:45:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 11:46:38 AM EDT by Hellraiser]
I wish the USA had not gone to Vietnam, would have liked to known my father (died in Vietnam). I don't see that we accomplished anything there other than lots of dead american soldiers. To fight communism? Where is communism now? Stocking our Walmart shelves... makes me sick, one day communism is our enemy, we must fight it to the death, the next day the leader of communism on earth (China) has favored nation trading status and fills our stores with crap. I'm sick of losing relatives and friends for bullshit political whims that don't amount to anything. And to think I volunteered for the Marine Corps, WTF was I thinking?

Don't mind me, just having a bad day - best friend got himself killed last night on his 3 week old motorcycle.


Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:47:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hellraiser:
I wish the USA had not gone to Vietnam, would have liked to known my father (died in Vietnam). I don't see that we accomplished anything there other than lots of dead american soldiers. To fight communism? Where is communism now? Stocking our Walmart shelves... makes me sick, one day communism is our enemy, we must fight it to the death, the next day the leader of communism on earth (China) has favored nation trading status and fills our stores with crap. I'm sick of losing relatives and friends for bullshit political whims that don't amount to anything. And to think I volunteered for the Marine Corps, WTF was I thinking?

Don't mind me, just having a bad day - best friend got himself killed last night on his 3 week old motorcycle.





that's why they say hind sight is 20/20
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 11:57:16 AM EDT
I checked the "not sure" because there has been a lot of finger pointing "he said, she said" sort of thing. The problem started with JFK(his track record isn't all that hot considering his fiasco at the Bay of Pigs, but he's the darling of the leftist and news media), and LBJ(he wasn't a general, but practically controlled the whole Vietnam war from the Oval Office), when Nixon came along, the anti-war fever pitch, and Nixon did the only honorable thing which was get the USA out of the Vietnam. But from then on, the news media switch it's focus from the war to the President because he was a republican.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:04:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chooper:
I think the main goal of the war was to stop the spread of communism - and not necessarily to stop communism in Viet Nam. If the US didn't fight that war, more countries would've fell to communist rule and we would've had a bigger problem to deal with.



I don't believe this argument anymore. If stopping the communists from taking over Vietnam was critical to stopping Communism from taking over SouthEast Asia, then you would sort of think that Communism would have spread like wildfire in 1973, when it became obvious that the US would NOT be able to fight a war to stop it.

But hindsight is 20/20...

There should actually be another option in your poll. The correct strategy was probably not to "go on the offensive" but rather to actually fight a real guerilla war. Throughout most of the Vietnam war, the US was preparing to fight a conventional war against the North. In doing so, the US neglected the strategy that it used during the Philippine insurrection (which was a guerrilla war that the US actually won). In the Philippine inserruction, the US concentrated on placing troops in villages, and ensuring the safety of individual villages, then gradually expanding this control. Westmoreland dismissed this strategy in Vietnam, insisting that the major threat was the massive invasion from the North.

Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:05:25 PM EDT
Viet Nam is now less Commie than NY,CA,and MA,plus a few otheres
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:20:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 12:42:43 PM EDT
I was alive then but not old enough to be there.
It was a war fought in a nearly inconsequential part of the world, fought half ass by us, and led by incompetent socialist politicians who unwittingly almost desroyed the Republic from within.


Those of you who think it was good we went there should ask the 58,000 left there how they feel about it. Or their families.

I might feel differently about it if we had actually tried to win and not just thrown some of our finest young lives away. Of course part of the reason I got out of the Marines was because I didn't like being a pawn to be sacrificed at the whim, or mistake, of some asshole socialist poltician.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:08:19 PM EDT
btt
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:11:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Hellraiser:
I wish the USA had not gone to Vietnam, would have liked to known my father (died in Vietnam). I don't see that we accomplished anything there other than lots of dead american soldiers. To fight communism? Where is communism now? Stocking our Walmart shelves... makes me sick, one day communism is our enemy, we must fight it to the death, the next day the leader of communism on earth (China) has favored nation trading status and fills our stores with crap. I'm sick of losing relatives and friends for bullshit political whims that don't amount to anything. And to think I volunteered for the Marine Corps, WTF was I thinking?

Don't mind me, just having a bad day - best friend got himself killed last night on his 3 week old motorcycle.





I must agree partially with you here -

My fiance's grandfather was in WWII (fighting the japense in the navy) He REFUSES! to buy anything not made in america - And my Fiance just cant seem to understand why . . . . .

well would you wanna support the people that shot at you and killed your friends ?

It does sicken me . . . . Im starting to hate china . . . .

I dont know if this is true - But supposedly on china leader once said "we will take over america with out ever firing a shot"
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:17:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/3/2005 3:11:32 PM EDT by Beefypeanut]
I think we went there to stop the spreading of Communism.

FWIW, my dad was an Army Ranger who fought in the war and he thinks that we shouldn't have been there.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:18:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By r3ydium:

I dont know if this is true - But supposedly on china leader once said "we will take over america with out ever firing a shot"



sounds about right
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:30:08 PM EDT
I had no problem with our reason for going to war there, just the asinine strategy used by LBJ and McNamara. If we'd had Nixon in office in 1965, he would have won that war. But by the time he was in office, the war was already hopeless.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:34:18 PM EDT
I think the reason we fought the war the way did was for one reason and one reason alone. If we had declared all out war against North Vietnam, then China and the USSR would have been involved with more than just weapons and training. The US Gov at the time decided that to prevent WWIII that the way we were fighting it needed to be done.

Do I agree with the way the war was fought? Hell no.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:42:37 PM EDT
I spent a year walking a beat between Nui Ba Ra and Nui Ba Den, went on the Incursion (know what that was?) so maybe can throw in my 2 cents...

1. The Incursion was a great thing, but too little too late. Once we gained the advantage, we retreated.
During the Incursion we destroyed more munitions than I ever dreamed were possible!

2. Bush lets the field commanders do their job. LBJ micromanaged EVERYTHING, so did Nixon. McNamera was a real pencilhead. If we had been blessed with Bush, Chainey and Rumsfeld, WOW!

3. They were primitive with less technology but absolutely no qualms about what they needed to do to win. We were technologically very advanced but with many rules and a public that had lost the desire to support the effort.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:43:32 PM EDT
3
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:44:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DougR:
I spent a year walking a beat between Nui Ba Ra and Nui Ba Den, went on the Incursion (know what that was?) so maybe can throw in my 2 cents...

1. The Incursion was a great thing, but too little too late. Once we gained the advantage, we retreated.
During the Incursion we destroyed more munitions than I ever dreamed were possible!

2. Bush lets the field commanders do their job. LBJ micromanaged EVERYTHING, so did Nixon. McNamera was a real pencilhead. If we had been blessed with Bush, Chainey and Rumsfeld, WOW!

3. They were primitive with less technology but absolutely no qualms about what they needed to do to win. We were technologically very advanced but with many rules and a public that had lost the desire to support the effort.



Thank you for your service to this country.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 1:51:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DougR:

1. The Incursion was a great thing, but too little too late. Once we gained the advantage, we retreated.
During the Incursion we destroyed more munitions than I ever dreamed were possible!



Agreed. If we'd hit Laos and Cambodia in 1965 (cut off Uncle Ho's trail) as well as started the Linebacker type bombing strikes against Hanoi and Haiphong also in 65, then things could have been dramatically different. By the time we did the things that would have won the war, it was too late. The public outcry was simply too much, because so much of the nation was anti-war by the time 1970 rolled around. But in 1965, there wasn't a huge anti-war movement. The handling of the war in it's first few years created more anti-war people than just the regular hippies. Many of these people would have been pro war with the proper strategy.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 2:02:30 PM EDT
I was in vietnam in 68 and 69. My brother was also there. I don't think we ever really lost a battle there, but that doesn't really matter. When we won, we'd pull back and they would take over again.
My feeling is that we could have won the war only if we were willing to kill every man woman and child in North Vietnam. We weren't. Bottom line..They were a very very determined foe and we weren't.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 2:08:12 PM EDT
If they ask your opinion of Secretary of Defense McNamara. The proper response would be -
He was a self serving doosh bag.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 2:22:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2005 2:22:52 PM EDT by LTVN68]

Originally Posted By Enigma102083:
I did some study into the begining of the war, even before the Viet Mihn defeated the french. It's very interesting how that went down....
From what I've read Ho Chi Mihn desperately asked for help from the US to help win independance for his country. He even asked the US state dept. to help write their consitution. But, there were concerns that communists might take control of France. So the ruling party in France said they would keep the communists out if we helped them in Vietnam. So we did, and Ho Chi Mihn was forced to seek help from Communist China, and the soviet union.




AND THAT WAS OUR HUGE POLITCAL MISTAKE!!!!!!! If we would only support those who believe in our principles....Wow! I'm gald we saved France so that they could be the wonderful friends they are today! Only 58,000 young Americans, but to a politician....well, who cares! Wasn't their kid dying.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 7:12:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mojo:

Originally Posted By Enigma102083:
I did some study into the begining of the war, even before the Viet Mihn defeated the french. It's very interesting how that went down....
From what I've read Ho Chi Mihn desperately asked for help from the US to help win independance for his country. He even asked the US state dept. to help write their consitution. But, there were concerns that communists might take control of France. So the ruling party in France said they would keep the communists out if we helped them in Vietnam. So we did, and Ho Chi Mihn was forced to seek help from Communist China, and the soviet union.



Someone will dispute me about this....But:

HCM travelled to France in 1917 and studied Karl Marx doctrine and became one of the founder members of French Communist Party in 1920), to Russia in 1924...and continued to study commie doctrine in Russia...So he was a commie...way before US involvement in VN in 1940.

BTW...US involvement in VN was a right thing to do to stop the spreading on commie.


yes, and then at the end of the war with the french he specificaly requested the US help him write a constitution based on the US constitution.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 10:59:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:03:40 AM EDT
No.
It was easily the biggest mistake our country made in the 20th century.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:07:56 AM EDT
Well, unfortunately I am old enough to have been a part of that little confict and was there in '71-'72. In retrospect, I don't think we should have been involved. We got involved because of a paranoia about communism that wasn't real in this case.

However, at the time I did think it was the right decision. Problem was, we didn't fight to win - what a waste.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:08:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Enigma102083:
some theorize that the entire war could have been avoided had we just helped NV create the democratic replublic(based on the US constitution) they wanted back in the 50s. But NOOOO we wanted to keep the god damn French happy.



They didn't want democracy they wanted independence. Communism was well established by that time and the revolution was underway shortly after France had its possessions returned.

I do agree that no colonies should have been returned to the original owners after WWII (France or otherwise). Roosevelt and Truman dropped the ball. Pentagon Papers

BTW we didn't give up. That war was won but the Church Amendment (thanks Demorats!) prevented us from defending the infant democracy.

Shok
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:11:45 AM EDT
We should have done EVERYTHING we could've to destroy the VC and NVA.

HH
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:15:19 AM EDT
Anyone who thinks we should have gone to Vietnam should take a look at the series "Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War".

Two important points. First, Ho Chi Minh wanted to get the French out of their colonial rule way back in the 1920s. He figured there were only two countries on earth that could help him do that. The first was the US. The second was the USSR. He went to the USSR only after the US turned him down.

Second, they had an interview with one of the top North Vietnamese officials after the war. As he explained it, the US military beat the hell out of them. Militarily, there was no contest, he said. "But," he said, "so what? We were getting beat for thirty years before you guys showed up and, if necessary, we will get beat by someone else for thirty years after you leave."

There were also some interesting interviews with some of our former "allies" who were working "on our side" throughout the whole thing. Turns out, lots of them were really agents for the other side and had no more love for us than they did for the French.

If we were still there the situation wouldn't be much different than it was when we left.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:15:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/21/2005 11:19:35 AM EDT by DanishM1Garand]

Originally Posted By cduarte:
we should have kicked the french out after WW2...



Just as we promised Ho Chi Mihn we would do. He wanted us to be an occupier of his country for 2 years or so to get on thier feet, just like the Phillipenes. Then wanted us to hang around to keep any one else out (French). We caved cuz DeGaulle said if we didn't help him Stalin would.

Ho Chi Mihn was a small c Communist but a Capital N Nationalist, Kinda like Tito in Yugoslavia, Tito was an undercover ally of the US in the cold war.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:24:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HoustonHusker:
We should have done EVERYTHING we could've to destroy the VC and NVA.

HH



www.videoflicks.com/titles/1032/1032336.htm?SHOW=1&TYPE=3&ASSN=20482

Watch this and call us back.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:37:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HoustonHusker:
We should have done EVERYTHING we could've to destroy the VC and NVA.

HH



And there's the problem...we didn't. Micromanagement from McNamara and LBJ got a lot of men killed.
Yes, I think we should have been there, but not fought it the way we did. Keep the politicians in DC, let the military worry about how to fight. I was too young, but my Uncle was a Major. He always said we could have won it in 6 months if we were allowed to fight.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:41:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By X_Ring:

Originally Posted By HoustonHusker:
We should have done EVERYTHING we could've to destroy the VC and NVA.

HH



And there's the problem...we didn't. Micromanagement from McNamara and LBJ got a lot of men killed.
Yes, I think we should have been there, but not fought it the way we did. Keep the politicians in DC, let the military worry about how to fight. I was too young, but my Uncle was a Major. He always said we could have won it in 6 months if we were allowed to fight.



Have you ever seen "Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War"?

I am guessing that neither you nor your uncle have seen it. Winning the military fight wasn't the problem.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:41:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KDragon:
The North was ready to quit from the constant bombing of the cities in the North. The commies in America cried so loud we quit bombing. They should have kept up the bombing and wiped out their infrastructure.

I'm glad America went to Vietnam. If they didn't I would be living in Communist Vietnam or dead. I got out in 1975, I was 6 months old.

Thanks to all the vets, especially Vietnam vets.



I totally agree with you, would the US continue bombing North Viet Nam one more week, Hanoi would have surrendered.
North Viet Nam should have been brought back to the stone age.

As a south vietnamese veteran, I feel deeply sorry that we have lost this country to the commies and that so many galant soldiers, both US & south vietnamese have given the ultimate sacrifice in vain.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 11:43:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By LRRPS:

I totally agree with you, would the US continue bombing North Viet Nam one more week, Hanoi would have surrendered.
North Viet Nam should have been brought back to the stone age.

As a south vietnamese veteran, I feel deeply sorry that we have lost this country to the commies and that so many galant soldiers, both US & south vietnamese have given the ultimate sacrifice in vain.



So what would their surrender have meant when many of our own allies in South Vietnam were working against us?
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:05:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wolfman97:

Originally Posted By LRRPS:

I totally agree with you, would the US continue bombing North Viet Nam one more week, Hanoi would have surrendered.
North Viet Nam should have been brought back to the stone age.

As a south vietnamese veteran, I feel deeply sorry that we have lost this country to the commies and that so many galant soldiers, both US & south vietnamese have given the ultimate sacrifice in vain.



So what would their surrender have meant when many of our own allies in South Vietnam were working against us?



Obviously they were not your allies but VC infiltrators.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:10:21 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:20:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LRRPS:

Obviously they were not your allies but VC infiltrators.



Call them what you want but it was obvious that 1) there were lots of them in high places and 2) there was no good way to tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys"; and 3) the "good guys" weren't any less corrupt than the "bad guys".

Read the short history posted above. We could have approached Vietnam a dozen different ways that would have been better than war.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:24:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:34:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/22/2005 7:36:21 AM EDT by mojo]
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:40:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mojo:

Originally Posted By DanishM1Garand:

Originally Posted By cduarte:
we should have kicked the french out after WW2...



Just as we promised Ho Chi Mihn we would do. He wanted us to be an occupier of his country for 2 years or so to get on thier feet, just like the Phillipenes. Then wanted us to hang around to keep any one else out (French). We caved cuz DeGaulle said if we didn't help him Stalin would.
In the POV of the movers and shakers in DC at the time, they thought "GLOBALLY": Russia commies and its cohorts were spreading in Europe, they were a bigger thread than a small southeast Asia called Vietnam. The so-called outpost in Europe at the time was anchored by the Brit., France, and some smaller countries. So helping the French in VN was a trade-off for French's commitment to Europe League if SHTF. I doubt that DeGaulle wanted anything to do with Stalin.

Ho Chi Mihn was a small c Communist but a Capital N Nationalist, Kinda like Tito in Yugoslavia, Tito was an undercover ally of the US in the cold war.
I have to disagree with you here. If HCM was a 'Capital N Nationalist. then after the split of VN in 1954, HCM would turn north VN to a capitalist country, instead of commie country. How come?




It is where his bread was buttered at the time.
Link Posted: 9/21/2005 12:43:06 PM EDT
Absolutely we were right to intervene. Look what happened when we refused to win and left.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top