America Won the Vietnam War ! - Yes you heard right., page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times


reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 04:44 AM by OzWeatherman
reply to post by esecallum



Like I said before

Troll poo

Nobody agrees with you......get over it

No more feeding the trolls....


reply posted on 20-8-2009 @ 04:51 AM by spellbound
reply to post by esecallum



How cool,

Killing millions of people - well how great! Would you care if that was your mother, your father, your baby sister or brother - well, no - you obviously would not care if someone came in right now and killed all of you - that would add to the great tally.

And who do you think is better off because everyone was killed?

NO-BODY. That is the answer. The world is wounded.



reply posted on 21-8-2009 @ 07:28 AM by esecallum
reply to post by oconnection



We won that war.the figures prove that.in every single encounter we came out on top.

THAT WAR SPURRED A HUGE TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCE in out military capability.

While the vietnamese hid in the bushes for 10 years our scientists were making huge advances.

In irak we showed that advance when the irakis ran from kuwait.our helicopters did a turkey shoot on that iraki military convoy killing 50000 in one fell swoop without a single loss.

wow!

imagine that as ultimate victory.

as pointed out to you already body count is the indicator of victory after 1945 as prior to that war was much more personal and face to face.

now we can sit sit and destroy the enemy many miles away just by pressing a button or a trigger.

if we had a war with jungle enemies today we would simply destroy the jungle and the enemy using daisy cutter and air aerosols weapons.



[edit on 21-8-2009 by esecallum]


reply posted on 21-8-2009 @ 08:04 AM by oconnection
Originally posted by esecallum
We won that war.the figures prove that.in every single encounter we came out on top.

THAT WAR SPURRED A HUGE TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCE in out military capability.


I guess the history books and experts definition of who won the war are very different than yours. By your definition we lost the Revolutionary War because our looses were greater.

Winning a war is not about how much death you inflict on the opposing side. Winning war is meeting your objective. Our objective was not met with Vietnam.

The other sides objective when it comes to Vietnam was met in throwing out the invaders of there country and reuniting the south with north.

So by definition and simply examining the outcome one can easily conclude that we did not meet our objective and we did loose that war.

On the matter of technological advance, what's your point? If you study any war you will find that war there is always technological advances as a result. Look at the bow and arrow, the Gatling gun, gun powder, the tank, ect.


While the vietnamese hid in the bushes for 10 years our scientists were making huge advances.

Isn't it sad, with all our technological advantages we couldn't beat a person hiding in the bush.

It's a matter of determination. We had a draft, many on our side were simply trying to make it through there tour of duty. There was no sense of defending there country. There was no war declared. It was a very unpopular war. We as a country did not have the will power or support to continue fighting.

On the other hand the Vietnamese did. They saw it as fighting and dieing for there country, most in our country did not.

It was an unconventional war and 3/4ths of it we fought it conventionally. In the beginning we had the right idea. We were fighting fire with fire. We sent in the Green Berets, the Navy Seals, the Delta Force.

These are the lessons that our military leaders learned from Vietnam and in fact if you bother to study was one of the positive out comes for us from a military stand point.


In irak we showed that advance when the irakis ran from kuwait.our helicopters did a turkey shoot on that iraki military convoy killing 50000 in one fell swoop without a single loss.


Google spell check will help you greatly, sir.

Again we can apply the Vietnam model to this war. Iraq had no standing army that could confront us directly. So what kind of war we/are facing. An unconventional one.

You see, you are viewing winning a war in a purely numerical form when winning a war is not that simple.

If war was that simply, why not lob nukes at a country and call it day?

[edit on 21-8-2009 by oconnection]


reply posted on 23-8-2009 @ 02:52 PM by Lucifersjester
reply to post by esecallum



its statments like this from idiots like you that realy makes the rest of the world hate americans, ( and Im sure most well informed and intelligent americans are cringeing with embarrasment reading what you wrote)


reply posted on 24-8-2009 @ 05:46 AM by oconnection
reply to post by Lucifersjester



Indeed, I for one am embarrassed for my country because of people like this. Please do not think for a minute this this type of person represents my country as a whole.

Although, sadly we find more of these types poking there heads up, more often then not these days.

This person, seemingly never went to college or took a history course, his arguments are not even logical. This person obviously has no basic understanding what it is to fight and win a war, you put to shame all those who have fought and died for our country! Shame on you.

Is this how we "won" the Vietnam War?




[edit on 24-8-2009 by oconnection]


reply posted on 24-8-2009 @ 11:03 AM by JohnnyCanuck
reply to post by esecallum


Take pride in the wars fought for the right reasons, whether 'won or lost'. But have enough sense to know the difference.




reply posted on 24-8-2009 @ 09:32 PM by dooper
reply to post by UltimateSin



How in hell can you suggest it was a failure?

First, state the objective.

If you have no stated objective, you can have no failure.

And you can't state the objective, because we had none.

Thus, we couldn't have failed.


reply posted on 24-8-2009 @ 10:42 PM by UltimateSin
Originally posted by dooper
reply to
post by UltimateSin



How in hell can you suggest it was a failure?

First, state the objective.

If you have no stated objective, you can have no failure.

And you can't state the objective, because we had none.

Thus, we couldn't have failed.


To stop communism. First it was a police action but that wasn't good enough they had to turn it into a war, they had to get rid of the evil commies. Leading to a long and bloody war. Nothing like sending your children to die over paranoia.


reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 04:23 PM by luckyd
reply to post by esecallum



lets hope mateyboy is joking if not im sorry, but thats pretty ignant. for starters the vietnam war was an illegal war. the pretext was the bombing of american PT boats by the vietnamnese, it never happen. So all in all a rather pointless post. i thought the site was opposed to ignorance. sorry
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Nano Drones Flying in Formation
  Posted 10 days ago with 15 member flags
FPS RUSSIA
  Posted 15 days ago with 7 member flags
Spinel Thin Transparent Ceramic Armor defeats Barrett .50 Cal BMG
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
Self-steering Bullet Researched
  Posted 11 days ago with 5 member flags
Shockrounds take out three of your five senses.
  Posted 4 days ago with 5 member flags
Defective Ammunition Warning
  Posted 3 days ago with 5 member flags